On Fri, 08 Sep 2023 02:25:38 -0300
Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote:
> Attribute sym, named after symver, is the one in the latest version of
> the patch. mnemonic_alias, convenience_alias and asm_alias are other
> possibilities that comes to mind. The 2020-August thread has many more.
Sounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111335
Bug ID: 111335
Summary: fmaddpch seems not commutative for operands[1] and
operands[2] due to precision loss
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 10:25 PM Lehua Ding wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch adds support that tries to fold `MIN (poly, poly)` to
> a constant. Consider the following C Code:
Does it make sense to handle max also?
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> ```
> void foo2 (int* restrict a, int* restrict b, int n)
> {
>
Hi,
This patch adds support that tries to fold `MIN (poly, poly)` to
a constant. Consider the following C Code:
```
void foo2 (int* restrict a, int* restrict b, int n)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i += 1)
a[i] += b[i];
}
```
Before this patch:
```
void foo2 (int * restrict a, int *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 55853
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55853=edit
Patch which I am testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Yeah, rewriting it to an inline function sounds like the right
fix to me FWIW. The call looks valid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
And here is the fix for phiopt:
```
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-phiopt.cc b/gcc/tree-ssa-phiopt.cc
index 9993bbe5b76..9b44ca9758a 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-phiopt.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-phiopt.cc
@@ -2073,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107800
--- Comment #6 from Amatul Adeeba ---
I mean even after trying the typo that is mentioned above, the error still
occurs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually this is the fix for the match pattern:
```
diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
index 8c24dae71cd..c7b6db4b543 100644
--- a/gcc/match.pd
+++ b/gcc/match.pd
@@ -5438,11 +5438,11 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Summary|ICE is reported
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
--- Comment #6 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> (In reply to chenglulu from comment #3)
> > This involves the template di3_fake:
> > (define_insn "di3_fake"
> > [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r,,")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #9 from d_vampile ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (In reply to d_vampile from comment #7)
> > In terms of runtime, this code is the best.
>
> Depends on the core
> What does -mtune=native provide for the core
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to d_vampile from comment #7)
> In terms of runtime, this code is the best.
Depends on the core
What does -mtune=native provide for the core which you are running on?
Also what core are you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
--- Comment #4 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
--- Comment #3 from chenglulu ---
This involves the template di3_fake:
(define_insn "di3_fake"
[(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r,,")
(sign_extend:DI
(any_div:SI (match_operand:DI 1 "register_operand" "r,r,0")
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
--- Comment #2 from chenglulu ---
This problem occurred after adding the r14-3511 optimization.
However, during the debugging process, it was discovered that it was due to the
attempt to generate rtx during the combine pass optimization.
(set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111306
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
A patch is posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-September/629650.html
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,} on SPR.
Ready push to trunk and backport to GCC13/GCC12.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/111306
* config/i386/sse.md (int_comm): New int_attr.
(fma__):
Remove % for Complex conjugate operations since they're not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
--- Comment #1 from chenglulu ---
$ gcc test.c -o - -S -O1
test.c: 在函数‘add_startpgm’中:
test.c:33:1: 编译器内部错误：在 simplify_subreg 中，于 simplify-rtx.cc:7538
33 | }
| ^
0x13506f4 simplify_context::simplify_subreg(machine_mode, rtx_def*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111334
Bug ID: 111334
Summary: ICE is reported during the combine pass optimization
Product: gcc
Version: rust/master
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #7 from d_vampile ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> GCC 11+ produces:
> .L3:
> vmovdqu (%rsi), %ymm2
> vmovdqu 32(%rsi), %ymm1
> subq$-128, %rdi
> subq$-128, %rsi
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #6 from d_vampile ---
GCC 7.3.0 produces:
extern __inline __m256i __attribute__((__gnu_inline__, __always_inline__,
__artificial__))
_mm256_loadu_si256 (__m256i_u const *__P)
{
return *__P;
401170: c5 fa 6f 1e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #5 from d_vampile ---
According to the analysis, the following two prs may cause the preceding
problems:
PR1:https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/dd9b529f08c3c6064c37234922d298336d78caf7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
The tree-ssa-phiopt.cc code is much more complex.
But not testing arg_true/arg_false against alt_larger/alt_smaller does fix the
issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111306
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111333
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111306
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111333
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Isn't this a dup of bug 111306 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Maybe use $(AM_V_at) instead? That would allow it to be controlled by
the --enable-silent-rules flag to configure, as well as make V=1 vs.
make V=0 too.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:32 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Any objections to this change?
>
> -- >8 --
>
> This removes the 39
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111333
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
The test failed since GCC12 when the pattern is added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111333
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
fmulcph/fmaddcph is commutative for operands[1] and operands[2], but
fcmulcph/fcmaddcph is not, since it's Complex conjugate operations.
Below change fixes the issue.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.4.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111333
Bug ID: 111333
Summary: Runtime failure for fcmulcph instrinsic
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
On 2023-09-08 04:33 Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
>On Thu, 07 Sep 2023 13:16:36 PDT (-0700), dimi...@dinux.eu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch appears to have caused PR 111259.
Hi Patrick
We're reproducing the issue also.
One thing that puzzles me is why a zcmp predicate casused
a regression in
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common/config/loongarch/loongarch-common.cc:
(default_options loongarch_option_optimization_table):
Default to -fsched-pressure.
---
gcc/common/config/loongarch/loongarch-common.cc | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
--- Comment #2 from d_vampile ---
gcc7.3.0 program use vmovups and vmovups instructions , but gcc10.3.0 program
only use vmovups instructions.In addition, the order of the two assembly
instructions is not consistent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
d_vampile changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d_vampile at 163 dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111332
Bug ID: 111332
Summary: Using GCC7.3.0 and GCC10.3.0 to compile the same test
case, assembler file instructions are different and
performance fallback is obvious.
Product:
Accoring to Kito's advice, using "MASK(name) Var(other_flag_name)"
to generate MASK and TARGET MACRO automatically.
This patch improve the MACRO generation of MASK_* and TARGET_*.
Due to the more and more riscv extensions are added, the default target_flag
is full.
Before this patch,if you want to
From: Tsukasa OI
This is in parity with the LLVM commit 599421ae36c3 ("[RISCV] Re-define
sha256, Zksed, and Zksh intrinsics to use i32 types.").
SHA-256, SM3 and SM4 instructions operate on 32-bit integers and upper
32-bits have no effects on RV64 (the output is sign-extended from the
original
Hi,
This is built on another RFC PATCH "RISC-V: Change RISC-V bit manipulation
/ scalar crypto builtin types" and changes SHA-256, SM3 and SM4 intrinsics
operate on uint32_t, not on XLEN-bit wide integers.
This is in parity with the LLVM commit 599421ae36c3 ("[RISCV] Re-define
sha256, Zksed, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The one which I had missed:
_Bool f(int x, int y, int w, int z)
{
_Bool a = z == w;
_Bool b = x == y;
return (a & !b) | (a ^ b); // a ^ b
}
Hi,
I noticed that adding incremental LTO was a GSoC project that was not
claimed this cycle (
https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/programs/2023/organizations/gnu-compiler-collection-gcc).
I was curious about working on this project, but wanted to check on the
state of the project. Has it already
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110529
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
PR analyzer/110529 notes that -fanalyzer was giving up on execution
paths that follow a computed goto, due to ignoring CFG edges with the
flag EDGE_ABNORMAL set.
This patch implements enough handling for them to allow analysis of
such execution paths to continue.
Successfully bootstrapped &
Successfully bootstrapped & regrtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Pushed to trunk as r14-3793-g18f1f79ec5b1f1.
gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
* region-model.h: fix -Wunused-parameter warnings
---
gcc/analyzer/region-model.h | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110529
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b761fede44afac5fa72e77caced9beda93fb381
commit r14-3796-g1b761fede44afac5fa72e77caced9beda93fb381
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
Snapshot gcc-11-20230907 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20230907/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
In the conversion of iranges to wide_int (commit cb779afeff204f), I
mistakenly made contains_zero_p() return TRUE for undefined ranges.
This means the rest of the patch was adjusted for this stupidity.
For example, we ended up doing the following, to make up for the fact
that contains_zero_p was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||14.0
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski
On 9/7/23 16:12, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/6/23 18:07, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for
trunk? This cache apparently has a 98% hit rate for TYPE_HAS_CONVERSION
types on some test files.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
int a;
int b;
int main() {
int d = b+30;
{
int t;
if (d < 29)
t = 29;
else
t = (d > 28) ? 28 : d;
a = t;
}
volatile int t = a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
For the trunk the problem is in match (and phiopt)
Match pattern:
/* Optimize (a CMP CST1) ? max : a */
r6-7425-ga9fee7cdc3c62d0e51730b6a9814909c557d3070 most likely introduced it for
GCC 6.
For the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
For the trunk:
```
phiopt match-simplify trying:
_3 > 28 ? _9 : 29
Applying pattern match.pd:5446, gimple-match-3.cc:3125
phiopt match-simplify back:
_5 = MAX_EXPR <_9, 29>;
result: _5
accepted the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110830
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Benjamin Priour :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d2274b9e346f44f8f6598b9dbb9fa95259274a2
commit r14-3794-g7d2274b9e346f44f8f6598b9dbb9fa95259274a2
Author: benjamin priour
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102317
--- Comment #12 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Kees Cook from comment #11)
> The trouble with "optimize" is that it just doesn't work. The kernel has
> banned its use because it results in all other optimization options being
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111331
Bug ID: 111331
Summary: Wrong code at -O1 on x86_64-linux-gnu since
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
On Thu, 07 Sep 2023 13:16:36 PDT (-0700), dimi...@dinux.eu wrote:
Hi,
This patch appears to have caused PR 111259.
Thanks. Looks like wer'e not running our tests with RTL checking,
Patrick is going to try and see if we've got compute time left for some
builds -- even just having builds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108957
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Mikael,
are you still onto it?
Hi,
This patch appears to have caused PR 111259.
Regards,
Dimitar
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 08:37:46AM +, Fei Gao wrote:
> From: Die Li
>
> Signed-off-by: Die Li
> Co-Authored-By: Fei Gao
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/peephole.md: New pattern.
> *
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 9/6/23 18:07, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for
> > trunk? This cache apparently has a 98% hit rate for TYPE_HAS_CONVERSION
> > types on some test files.
>
> Does it make a measurable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111330
Bug ID: 111330
Summary: [13 Regression] Bootstrap failure building SeqFile.lo
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
A new failure has been detected on builder gccrust-gentoo-sparc while building
gccrust.
Full details are available at:
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/241/builds/993
Build state: failed '! grep ...' (failure)
Revision: b6284bd9ff6f54136e6a88c261546a2b6ff12572
Worker:
On 7.9.2023 19:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29/08/23 15:04 +0300, Pekka Seppänen wrote:
>> libstdc++: Fix -Wunused-parameter warnings when _GLIBCXX_USE_WCHAR_T is
>> not defined.
>>
>> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * src/c++11/cow-locale_init.cc: Add [[maybe_unused]] attribute.
>> *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110875
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It is the one that appears to trigger this failure, though. And as for being a
duplicate of that other one I see this on both powerpc64 BE and LE.
git bisect log
git bisect start
# good:
When range_of_stmt invokes prefill_name to evaluate unvisited
dependneciesit should not mark visited names as always_current.
when raner_cache::get_globaL_range() is invoked with the optional
"current_p" flag, it triggers additional functionality. This call is
meant to be from within ranger
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110875
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf2ae3fff4ee9bf884b122ee6cd83bffd791a16f
commit r14-3792-gcf2ae3fff4ee9bf884b122ee6cd83bffd791a16f
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
On 9/6/23 18:07, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for
trunk? This cache apparently has a 98% hit rate for TYPE_HAS_CONVERSION
types on some test files.
Does it make a measurable difference in compile time?
+/* A cache of the result of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111324
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111328
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Possibly another duplicate of bug 110483.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97122
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111226
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #19 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #17)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
Your proposed patch for the friend issue does fix the libstdc++ cases for my
Darwin patchset.
> > many of the c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111329
Bug ID: 111329
Summary: [14 regression]
gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-1-debug.c fails
after r14-3745-g4f4fa2501186e4
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
On 9/6/23 18:09, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 8/24/23 09:31, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 8/21/23 21:51, Patrick Palka wrote:
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look like
a reasonable
On 9/7/23 11:23, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 04:36:34PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/5/23 15:59, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 10:52:04AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/1/23 13:23, Marek Polacek wrote:
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111274
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111274
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ab4bdad49716eb1c60e22e0e617d5eb56b0bac6f
commit r14-3791-gab4bdad49716eb1c60e22e0e617d5eb56b0bac6f
Author: Sandra Loosemore
On 9/7/2023 6:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 9/6/23 11:50, Edwin Lu wrote:
This patch turns on the assert which ensures every instruction has type
that is not TYPE_UNKNOWN.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_sched_variable_issue): Remove assert
And this is fine. But hold off
On Mon, 2023-09-04 at 22:13 -0400, Eric Feng wrote:
> Hi Dave,
Hi Eric, thanks for the patch.
>
> Recently I've been working on symbolic value support for the reference
> count checker. I've attached a patch for it below; let me know it looks
> OK for trunk. Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Eric
>
> ---
On 9/6/2023 4:33 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
csr is kind of confusing, I would suggest something like `pushpop` and
`mvpair`.
Sounds good! I'll make the update.
Edwin
On Mon, 2023-09-04 at 22:13 -0400, Eric Feng wrote:
> Hi Dave,
Hi Eric, thanks for the patch.
>
> Recently I've been working on symbolic value support for the reference
> count checker. I've attached a patch for it below; let me know it looks
> OK for trunk. Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Eric
>
> ---
On 9/6/2023 4:23 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
LGTM
Edwin Lu 於 2023年9月7日 週四 01:51 寫道：
This patch adds types to vector instructions that were added after
or were
missed by the original patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628594.html
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
for changes to libstdc++ or the FE I usually run "make check-c++" which does
the library (plus the libgomp and itm deps) and the FE.
My guess is that the FE is referencing something that needs to have an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #17 from François Dumont ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
>
> many of the c++ fails are of this form:
>
> contracts-tmpl-spec1.C:(.text+0x6f): undefined reference to
>
On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 10:18:37AM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> This ICE was caused by an invalid assumption that all BIND_EXPRs have
> a non-null BIND_EXPR_BLOCK. In C++ these do exist and are used for
> temporaries introduced in expressions that are not full-expressions.
> Since they have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #14)
> Good news then.
>
> On my side I only had some failures due to a faulty friend declaration in
> gnu-versioned-namespace mode in for which I've submitted a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #13)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11)
> > > (In reply to François Dumont from comment #10)
> > > > This is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #14 from François Dumont ---
Good news then.
On my side I only had some failures due to a faulty friend declaration in
gnu-versioned-namespace mode in for which I've submitted a patch:
Hi
Any news regarding this problem ?
François
On 23/08/2023 19:35, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
The few tests that are failing in versioned namespace mode are due to
those friend declarations.
This is a fix proposal even if I considered 2 other options:
1. Make __format::_Arg_store a struct
On 01/09/2023 10:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 20:52, François Dumont via Libstdc++
wrote:
Hi
Any feedback regarding this patch ?
This is a fairly large patch
I've decided to split it, at least in 2.
So just ignore this one, I'll submit new ones once abi issue is
1 - 100 of 250 matches
Mail list logo
