https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109484
--- Comment #6 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
A better testcase:
```c
void kkk(void **const pp)
{
void *temp;
__asm__ volatile (
"movq $0xff, %0\n\t"
"movq $0xff, %1"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109484
--- Comment #5 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to 。 from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > > but you clobber 'temp'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109484
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> but you clobber 'temp' early and fail to indicate that so GCC allocates the
> same register as part of the "+m&quo
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
For code:
```c
void kkk(void **const pp)
{
void *temp;
__asm__ volatile (
"movq %1, %0\n\t"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108441
--- Comment #1 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
When compiling with `-fno-tree-slp-vectorize`, it seems to be better:
```
kkk:
movl$16, %eax
movw%ax, ldap(%rip)
ret
```
: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
For the C code:
```c
#include
extern struct __attribute__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81036
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
gcc 12.2 -fcall-saved-xmm0 not work too, target and host is x86-64.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
According to https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
```
-ffinite-loops
Assume that a loop with an exit will eventually take the exit and not loop
indefinitely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105510
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> As a workaround it works with
>
> struct Test t=(struct Test){1, {3, 4}};
>
> I don't think it your way of writin
: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
clang can success compile it but gcc can't. MSVC can't too, I'm not sure this
is a bug.
test.c
```
struct Test2
{
long int x;
long int y;
};
struct Test
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105342
--- Comment #4 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Is it really important though?
The doc says that "The asm statement allows you to include assembly
instructions directly within C
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This is an enhancement request, not a bug.
According to doc, using the "memory" clobber effectively forms a read/write
memory b
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I have read the https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888 , according
to this, adding `-fno-tree-loop-distribute-patterns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104763
--- Comment #8 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> Note that the case of an endless loop is somewhat special since the store
> is dead there since there is no way to reach a load fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #5 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> rbp is hard frame pointer, so depending on whether the function needs a
> frame pointer (at -O0 I think all functions do), the re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #3 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Clobber of "rsp" makes no sense, you can't change the value of the stack
> pointer in inline asm without restoring it ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
--- Comment #4 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> What exactly are you trying to achieve (because & on your testcase makes no
> sense at all, the other input is "r" and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104805
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Clobber of "rsp" makes no sense, you can't change the value of the stack
> pointer in inline asm without restoring it ba
are both in the in the clobber
list
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104804
--- Comment #2 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> +m is handled as =m with corresponding m, early clobber for that doesn't
> make sense, on one side you require that the input i
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
When using "+&m" in the Output Operands, the compile will always failed,
however, the &qu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104786
--- Comment #1 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
gcc-9 crashed too
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 52565
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52565&action=edit
/tmp/ccusgsXN.out
log:
```
ig@ig-virtual-machine:~/temp$ gcc-12 test5.c -S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104763
--- Comment #3 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Can't reproduce with -O2, with -O1 there are 2 stores instead of 3
> before the endless loop start
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104763
--- Comment #1 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
change `*i=0x0700070007000700;` to `*(volatile size_t *)i=0x0700070007000700;`
will fix it.
This is my mistake
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
file test.c:
```
#include
#include
#include
void move_up()
{
for ( size_t* i=(size_t *)(0xb8000+160*24); ; )
{
*i=0x0700070007000700;
//if ( i == (size_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98261
--- Comment #3 from 。 <570070308 at qq dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> The bug reporting guidelines tell you to try -fsanitize=undefined before
> reporting a bug. That would have told you your code is w
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In
```
#include
#include
class A
{
public:
virtual void print()
{
printf("A\n");
}
};
class B
{
public:
virtual
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In the code
```
#include
#include
struct A
{
public:
int a;
std::vector m;
};
int main()
{
A x;
x.m.emplace_back();
x.a=13;
x.m[0].a=9;
printf("%d\n",x.m[0].a);
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
for the code:
signed int a=2147483647;
if( (signed int)( (signed int)a + (signed int)1 ) < (signed int)2147483647
)
{
printf("111\n");
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 48892
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48892&action=edit
The full log file
Successfully build gcc-11-20200705 and gcc-11-2
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 48789
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48789&action=edit
the .ii file
class A
Priority: P3
Component: go
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: 570070308 at qq dot com
CC: cmang at google dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 48781
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48781&action=edit
fullscreenlo
33 matches
Mail list logo
