https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112619
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c44bd92a86db3fcdeb4a66ce2f3222d13af0681
commit r14-5814-g1c44bd92a86db3fcdeb4a66ce2f3222d13af0681
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112674
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112690
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112344
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7d82b45edeed99a850595eee0e59d16c4df7aff
commit r14-5813-ga7d82b45edeed99a850595eee0e59d16c4df7aff
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112695
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112336
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112695
Bug ID: 112695
Summary: ICE: in gen_reg_rtx, at emit-rtl.cc:1208 with
-fsanitize=address -c
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112694
--- Comment #2 from JuzheZhong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I am going to do a similar testing with -march=armv9-a+sve on aarch64 to see
> if there is similar ones for the vectorizer.
No, I think ARM SVE won't have those
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112694
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||riscv
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
The following tries to reduce the number of cases we use an unsigned
type for the addition when we know the original signed increment was
OK which is when the total unsigned increment computed fits the signed
type as well.
This fixes the observed testsuite fallout.
Bootstrapped and tested on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112694
Bug ID: 112694
Summary: RISC-V: zve64d testing expose many ICE on C/C++
testing
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
> and this in tsubst_lambda_expr that assumes iobj:
>
> /* Fix the type of 'this'. */
> fntype = build_memfn_type (fntype, type,
> type_memfn_quals (fntype),
> type_memfn_rqual (fntype));
Unfortunately, putting a condition on this had some unforeseen
consequences. I've been working on this about
Hi, Richard.
Here is an example for vsext.vf2.
The general pattern for this instruction as follows:
(set (operand 0) (unspec:...(operand 1)))
We have a TARGET_MIN_VLEN macro which specify minimum VLEN according to -march
Consider this case V16QI -> V16HI of vsext.vf2
When TARGET_MIN_VLEN
Committed, thanks Kito.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Kito Cheng
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 2:30 PM
To: Juzhe-Zhong
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; kito.ch...@gmail.com; jeffreya...@gmail.com;
rdapp@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Optimize a special case of VLA SLP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112599
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d83013b88b74d1f1f774d94ca950d3b6dba26e5d
commit r14-5812-gd83013b88b74d1f1f774d94ca950d3b6dba26e5d
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Fri Nov
The optimization is relatively small, so LGTM, thanks :)
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 7:18 AM Juzhe-Zhong wrote:
>
> When working on fixing bugs of zvl1024b. I notice a special VLA SLP case
> can be better optimized.
>
> v = vec_perm (op1, op2, { nunits - 1, nunits, nunits + 1, ... })
>
> Before this
With -fno-fp-int-builtin-inexact, trunc is not allowed to raise
FE_INEXACT and it should produce an integral result (if the input is not
NaN or Inf). Thus FE_INEXACT should not be raised.
But (int)x may raise FE_INEXACT when x is a non-integer, non-NaN, and
non-Inf value. C23 recommends to do
When fixing bugs, I notice there is a piece odd codes look incorrect.
which probably make codegen worse.
#include
typedef int8_t vnx2qi __attribute__ ((vector_size (2)));
#define MASK_2(X, Y) (Y) - 1 - (X), (Y) - 2 - (X)
#define PERMUTE(TYPE, NUNITS)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111292
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111012
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111003
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110942
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110941
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110327
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107823
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #5 from
I don't think loop vectorizer can do more optimization here.
GCC pass to vec_perm_const targethook vec_perm <,,(nunits - 1, nunits , nuits +
1, )>
to handle that. It's very target dependent. We can't do more about that.
For RVV, it's better transform this case into vec_extract +
On Thu, 2023-11-23 at 18:03 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> The rint functions indeed don't set errno (don't have domain or range
> errors, at least if you ignore the option for signaling NaNs arguments to
> be domain errors - which is in TS 18661-1, but not what glibc does, and
> not in C23).
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112598
--- Comment #9 from Li Pan ---
Before tracer
-
ENTRY
|
+---+
| B2 |
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:49:39AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/13/23 06:58, Nathaniel Shead wrote:
> > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. I don't have write
> > access.
> >
> > -- >8 --
> >
> > The testcase noted in the PR fails because the context of the lambda is
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107398
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cff1fa6625d1273fcfaf473e436ba918262d8afa
commit r14-5810-gcff1fa6625d1273fcfaf473e436ba918262d8afa
Author: Nathaniel Shead
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:45:31AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/13/23 01:09, Nathaniel Shead wrote:
> > I happened to be browsing the standard a bit later and noticed that we
> > incorrectly reject the example given below.
> >
> > Bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; regtesting ongoing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96341
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111796
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> On aarch64 I see
>
> t.c:5:1: warning: GCC does not currently support mixed size types for 'simd'
> functions
> 5 | foo (int a, short b)
> | ^~~
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
--- Comment #27 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Haochen Jiang :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a1f8e65dee2d9e929cd083f36501d08bdc9c8072
commit r14-5809-ga1f8e65dee2d9e929cd083f36501d08bdc9c8072
Author: Haochen Jiang
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.0|---
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108321
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112693
Bug ID: 112693
Summary: declare-simd-4.f90 fails on aarch64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107071
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2022-09-28 00:00:00 |2023-11-23
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98885
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d89903ff29473e6e64f032ecee5c72d1584546dc
commit r14-5808-gd89903ff29473e6e64f032ecee5c72d1584546dc
Author: Nathaniel Shead
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 2:10 PM Haochen Jiang wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This patch should be able to fix the current issue mentioned in PR112643.
>
> Also, I fixed some legacy issues in code related to AVX512/AVX10.
>
> Ok for trunk?
Ok
>
> Thx,
> Haochen
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112692
Bug ID: 112692
Summary: LSAN is not compatiable with qemu user
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112691
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> For GCC 9 to GCC 13 the per-release series buildstat pages have not
>> been populated at all, so remove them and reference from the respective
>> main release pages.
> ACK; I had recently run into such an empty page, and wanted to suggest
> the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112691
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112691
Bug ID: 112691
Summary: [14 Regression] gcc.dg/vla-1.c fails
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Martin Uecker wrote:
> Tell the backend which types are equivalent by setting
> TYPE_CANONICAL to one struct in the set of equivalent
> structs. Structs are considered equivalent by ignoring
> all sizes of arrays nested in types below field level.
Is TYPE_CANONICAL *only*
ChangeLog:
* MAINTAINERS: Add myself to write after approval and DCO
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel Shead
---
MAINTAINERS | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index b70336761ab..0dbcbadcfd7 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -653,6 +653,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112690
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112690
Bug ID: 112690
Summary: [14 Regression] gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-17.c failure
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112689
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112689
Bug ID: 112689
Summary: [14 Regression] gcc.dg/tree-prof/time-profiler-[237].c
fail
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> So this is a more gradual lowering of the FP branches to allow ifcvt to do a
> better job. Seems generally reasonable. I don't expect that we're missing
> any significant simplifications, though I probably could construct a missed
> CSE/GCSE if I worked at
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Martin Uecker wrote:
> +enum tt { R = 2 } TT;
> +enum tt {
> + R = _Generic(, enum tt*: 0, default: 2)
> +};
> +// incomplete during construction
> +
> +enum A { B = 7 } y;
> +enum A { B = 7 };
> +
> +enum A { B = _Generic(, enum A*: 1, default: 7) };
I don't follow the
Thanks Robin.
Send V2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/638033.html
with adding changeLog since I realize changlog issue in V1:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv-v.cc (shuffle_extract_and_slide1up_patterns):
(expand_vec_perm_const_1):
Tested on
When working on fixing bugs of zvl1024b. I notice a special VLA SLP case
can be better optimized.
v = vec_perm (op1, op2, { nunits - 1, nunits, nunits + 1, ... })
Before this patch, we are using genriec approach (vrgather):
vid
vadd.vx
vrgather
vmsgeu
vrgather
With this patch, we use
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023, Martin Uecker wrote:
> * c-decl.cc (previous_tag): New function.
> (get_parm_info): Turn off warning for C2X.
C23 now, not C2X.
> (comptypes_internal): Activate comparison of tagged
> types (convert_for_assignment): Ingore qualifiers.
This still has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112688
Bug ID: 112688
Summary: [14 Regression] testcases: gcc.target/aarch64/movk.c
and vmulxd_*_2.c need to updated after
r14-5628-g53ba8d669550d3
Product: gcc
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> > Lift this restriction and only bail out if a non-word-mode integer
> > condition has been requested, as we cannot handle this specific case
> > owing to machine instruction set restriction. We already take care of
> > the non-integer, non-floating-point
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> > The reason to XFAIL SImode tests for RV64 targets is the compiler thinks
> > it has to sign-extend addends, which causes if-conversion to give up.
> WRT extension and causing if-conversion to give up. Yes, it's a real issue.
> In fact when we had Jivan do
Snapshot gcc-11-20231123 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20231123/
and on various mirrors, see https://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
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> Is this an improvement over what if-convert creates for a conditional add or
> is the goal to expose the sequence earlier in the pipeline rather than waiting
> for ifcvt?
TBH I haven't ever seen if-convert eliminate a branch here without this
pattern
I will need to not forget to update the function tree_type_to_jit_type
in dummy-frontend.cc to add back the support for bfloat16 when the
patch for it is merged.
On Thu, 2023-11-23 at 17:17 -0500, Antoni Boucher wrote:
> Hi.
> I did split the patch and sent one for the bfloat16 support and
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108762
Antoni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #54452|0 |1
is obsolete|
Hi.
I did split the patch and sent one for the bfloat16 support and another
one for the vector support.
Here's the updated patch for the machine-dependent builtins.
Regards.
On Sat, 2023-02-11 at 17:37 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 4:31 PM Antoni Boucher via Gcc-patches
On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> OK. Just curious are y'all seeing significant interest in this case from
> customers or is this more a case of rounding out the implementation to cover
> all potential possibilities?
As in the cover letter: we have a case where the pipeline seems to imply
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112675
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111880
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-23
Ever
David: I found back the comment you made. Here it is:
I see you have patches to add function and variable attributes; I
wonder if this would be cleaner internally if there was a
recording::attribute class, rather than the std::pair currently in
use
(some attributes have int
Dear all,
the PR is about a redundant obsolescence warning for COMMON when
a symbols appears in the scope of a submodule. As we did not warn
for use-associated symbols, it seemed natural to extend this to
symbols that are used in a submodule. Or am I missing anything?
Regtests cleanly on
libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Extend the small size optimization
A number of methods were still not using the small size
optimization which
is to prefer an O(N) research to a hash computation as long as N is
small.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits/hashtable.h:
libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Prefer to insert after last node
When inserting an element into an empty bucket we currently insert
the new node
after the before-begin node so in first position. The drawback of
doing this is
that we are forced to update the bucket that was containing
libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Avoid redundant usage of rehash policy
Bypass call to __detail::__distance_fwd and the check if rehash is
needed when
assigning an initializer_list to an unordered_multimap or
unordered_multiset.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
*
libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Fix some implementation inconsistencies
Get rid of the different usages of the mutable keyword. For
_Prime_rehash_policy methods are exported from the library, we need to
keep their const qualifier, so adapt implementation to update
previously
libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Enhance/Add performance benches
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/performance/23_containers/insert/54075.cc
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/performance/23_containers/insert/54075.cc
index f8fcce31609..f2d975ecdaf 100644
---
This is a series of patch to enhance _Hashtable insertion operations
that I'd like to see in gcc 14. I've already submitted something similar
a couple of months ago but it is quite a revisited version.
1/5 Is adding benches to show the impact of the different optimizations
2/5 Implementation
Yes, please take it, I don’t even remember what it does!
> On Nov 23, 2023, at 4:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 11/23/23 10:06, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> Anyone using contrib/regression/btest-gcc.sh besides me?
>> It has, besides a copyright update, not seen love and attention in a
>>
Ping David. :)
Le mer. 15 nov. 2023 à 17:56, Antoni Boucher a écrit :
>
> David: another thing I remember you mentioned when you reviewed an
> earlier version of this patch is the usage of `std::pair`.
> I can't find where you said that, but I remember you mentioned that we
> should use a struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112677
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 at 09:43, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 at 04:09, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
>> > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 02:58, Richard Sandiford
>> > > wrote:
>> > >> So I think the PR could
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112687
Bug ID: 112687
Summary: missed-optimization: switch statement does not
simplify to it's expression
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111880
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> Potential fix:
Regtests ok.
i.creativecommons.org now has a permanent redirect for the images
we use to licensebuttons.net, so follow that.
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/conduct-faq.html | 3 ++-
htdocs/conduct-report.html | 3 ++-
htdocs/conduct-response.html | 3 ++-
htdocs/conduct.html | 3 ++-
4 files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112686
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112645
--- Comment #2 from gooncreeper ---
I am going to move the second problem to it's own bug since I realize it
actually quite a different problem, and deserves it's own thread of discussion.
-r14-5791-20231123115417-g24592abd68e-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20231123 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112685
--- Comment #2 from gooncreeper ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I thought I had saw this a while back.
>
> Note the Linux kernel does this kind of loop explicity to avoid the division
> though as the cases where it does is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112683
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111880
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=112685
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I thought I had saw this a while back.
Note the Linux kernel does this kind of loop explicity to avoid the division
though as the cases where it does is known to be only a few iterations (1 or 2)
to get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112685
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112685
Bug ID: 112685
Summary: missed-optimization: division / modulo loops
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 340 matches
Mail list logo
