[Bug tree-optimization/114108] [14 regression] ICE when building opencv-4.8.1 (error: type mismatch in binary expression) since r14-1833

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114108 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/114108] [14 regression] ICE when building opencv-4.8.1 (error: type mismatch in binary expression) since r14-1833

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114108 --- Comment #9 from Tejas Belagod --- This seems to be the issue: ... VECITYPE is the vector form of PATTERN_STMT's result type. */ static gimple * vect_convert_output (vec_info *vinfo, stmt_vec_info stmt_info, tree type,

[Bug tree-optimization/114108] [14 regression] ICE when building opencv-4.8.1 (error: type mismatch in binary expression) since r14-1833

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114108 --- Comment #8 from Tejas Belagod --- I find this transformation a bit odd: ... pr114108.c:11:21: note: add new stmt: vect_patt_32.15_181 = .ABD (vect__3.11_177, vect__7.14_180); pr114108.c:11:21: note: -->vectorizing statement: patt_31

[Bug target/113780] [ARM] Incorrect indirect tailcall generated for PAC-enabled function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113780 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/112577] aarch64_class_max_nregs mishandles 64-bit structure modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112577 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/113780] [ARM] Incorrect indirect tailcall generated for PAC-enabled function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113780 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod --- Testing a fix as we speak..

[Bug target/113780] [ARM] Incorrect indirect tailcall generated for PAC-enabled function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113780 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/113780] [ARM] Incorrect indirect tailcall generated for PAC-enabled function.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113780 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |belagod at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/113780] New: [ARM] Incorrect indirect tailcall generated for PAC-enabled function.

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- For this piece of code: void fail(void (*f)(int, int, int, int)) { f(1, 2, 3, 4); } compiled with -mcpu=cortex-m85 -mbranch

[Bug target/112375] [14 Regression] vget_set_lane_1.c fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112375 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod --- Confirmed.

[Bug target/112375] [14 Regression] vget_set_lane_1.c fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112375 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Ever

[Bug target/112577] aarch64_class_max_nregs mishandles 64-bit structure modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112577 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/112577] aarch64_class_max_nregs mishandles 64-bit structure modes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112577 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod --- Confirmed. Testing a fix.

[Bug target/112577] aarch64_class_max_nregs mishandles 64-bit structure modes

|NEW Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-01-16 CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/96339] [SVE] Optimise svlast[ab]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/106339] [13 Regression] ICE in exact_div, at poly-int.h:2232

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106339 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Ever

[Bug target/96339] [SVE] Optimise svlast[ab]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod --- > Are you still working on this PR ? If not, can I assign it to myself ? Yes I am - its almost done - just been busy with a few higher priority things. I'll find some time to clean it up, test it and post

[Bug target/101845] wrong code at -O1 on aarch64 with __builtin_shufflevector()

|1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod --- Confirmed. (insn 11 10 12 2 (set (reg:V8QI 92 [ _1 ]) (mult:V8QI (reg:V8QI 100) (reg

[Bug target/101609] no right shift pattern for vector(2) long long on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101609 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/101609] no right shift pattern for vector(2) long long on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101609 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/101543] extra zeroing of empty struct argument/return value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101543 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug target/101543] extra zeroing of empty struct argument/return value

|1 Last reconfirmed||2021-07-29 CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/101609] no right shift pattern for vector(2) long long on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101609 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod --- > .. but still doesn't generate 'vector code' for the example shown here. Actually, it does. I was looking in the wrong place.

[Bug target/101609] no right shift pattern for vector(2) long long on aarch64

|1 CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #2 from Tejas Belagod --- As you rightly point out, vhsr3 pattern name seems to be using the wrong iterator. With the right iterator

[Bug target/101428] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'asm' clobber conflict with output operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101428 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Last

[Bug target/96339] [SVE] Optimise svlast[ab]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Target Milestone|---

[Bug target/96339] [SVE] Optimise svlast[ab]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/81580] New: [ARM] C++ zero-sized array generates undefined instruction.

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- This piece of code: #include std::array<int,0> arr; int foo (int i) { return arr[i]; } When compiled with: $ arm-none-eabi-g++

[Bug target/81551] New: [ARM] Incorrect STRD to misaligned address.

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- For this piece of code: void foo () { *((long long*)0x2000213F) = 0; } when compiled with $ arm-none-eabi-gcc -S -march=armv7-a /tmp/strd.c -O0 -marm -o - It generates

[Bug target/71607] [5/6/7 Regression] [ARM] ice due to forbidden enabled attribute dependency on instruction operands

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71607 Tejas Belagod changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug lto/67548] [5 Regression] LTO drops weak binding with "ld -r"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67548 --- Comment #14 from Tejas Belagod --- Author: belagod Date: Wed Dec 16 22:33:51 2015 New Revision: 231724 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231724=gcc=rev Log: Backport from Mainline PR lto/67548 * lto-plugin.c

[Bug rtl-optimization/64818] User specified register don't work correctly in inline-asm operands.

||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod --- Fixed in r222306.

[Bug rtl-optimization/64818] User specified register don't work correctly in inline-asm operands.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64818 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod --- Author: belagod Date: Thu Dec 10 17:13:47 2015 New Revision: 231531 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231531=gcc=rev Log: gcc/ChangeLog.arm: 2015-12-10 Tejas Belagod

[Bug c++/68385] [6 Regression] ICE building libstdc++ on arm-none-eabi

||2015-11-18 CC||belagod at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jason at redhat dot com Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod --- Confirmed on arm-none-eabi

[Bug libstdc++/64443] [5 Regression] New std::string implementation breaks tests on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64443 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/63679] [5 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #27 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- We'd want to scalarize this early preferably in SRA as it gives a chance to passes like vectorization to vectorize more loops. I checked that sra-max-scalarization-Osize{-Ospeed

[Bug target/63679] [5 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #29 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #28) On Mon, 9 Feb 2015, belagod at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #27

[Bug target/64231] [5 Regression] SIGSEGV building glibc on aarch64-linux-gnu from r217852

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231 --- Comment #18 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: belagod Date: Mon Feb 2 15:54:59 2015 New Revision: 220348 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220348root=gccview=rev Log: 2015-02-02 Tejas Belagod tejas.bela

[Bug target/64231] [5 Regression] SIGSEGV building glibc on aarch64-linux-gnu from r217852

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug testsuite/63971] Some of gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_*.c tests fail now

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971 --- Comment #9 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: belagod Date: Mon Jan 19 12:57:48 2015 New Revision: 219838 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219838root=gccview=rev Log: 2015-01-19 Tejas Belagod tejas.bela

[Bug libstdc++/64438] Removing string-conversion requirement causes libstdc++-v3 fails on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64438 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug testsuite/63971] Some of gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_*.c tests fail now

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971 --- Comment #6 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: belagod Date: Thu Jan 15 18:17:23 2015 New Revision: 219674 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219674root=gccview=rev Log: 2015-01-15 Tejas Belagod tejas.bela

[Bug testsuite/63971] Some of gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_*.c tests fail now

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED

[Bug target/64231] [5 Regression] SIGSEGV building glibc on aarch64-linux-gnu from r217852

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231 --- Comment #13 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Sandra Loosemore from comment #12) I'm using a 4.7.3 based gcc as the host compiler (built from one of our own CodeBench release branches). Regardless of whether

[Bug target/64231] [5 Regression] SIGSEGV building glibc on aarch64-linux-gnu from r217852

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231 --- Comment #14 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Also, I'm unable to build x-gcc with glibc at 1400983e04d7b4b5a92db79ab27b0d0ec7d8bdef due to an error: bin-trunk-linux/obj/glibc/intl/hash-string.os plural.c:182:5: error

[Bug middle-end/58739] libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-3.c causes ICE in the vectorizer.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58739 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/64473] [5.0 Regression] libstdc++-v3 tests fail to link on AArch64 tiny memory model.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64473 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug testsuite/63971] Some of gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_*.c tests fail now

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug target/56025] ARM NEON polynomial types have broken overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025 --- Comment #5 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- ACLE states that poly8_t and poly16_t are defined as unsigned integer types. It is unspecified whether these are the same type as uint8_t and uint16_t for overloading and mangling

[Bug target/56025] ARM NEON polynomial types have broken overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug target/56025] ARM NEON polynomial types have broken overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/56025] ARM NEON polynomial types have broken overload resolution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56025 --- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- The ABI does not define an internal type name for scalar poly types - http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0042e/IHI0042E_aapcs.pdf. This will need an ABI update.

[Bug libstdc++/64475] New: [5.0 Regression] FAIL: 28_regex/algorithms/regex_match/ecma/char/backref.cc

: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org backref regresses on AArch64. PASS-FAIL: 28_regex/algorithms/regex_match/ecma/char/backref.cc execution test $ .../builds/fsf-trunk/fsf-trunk

[Bug libstdc++/64475] [5.0 Regression] FAIL: 28_regex/algorithms/regex_match/ecma/char/backref.cc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64475 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fails on AArch32 too.

[Bug ipa/64472] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/inline-7.c

: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This new test added by r219108 fails on AArch64. NA-FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/inline-7.c scan-tree-dump-times einline Inlining a into m 1

[Bug ipa/64472] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/inline-7.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64472 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Only fails for -fPIC.

[Bug libstdc++/64473] New: libstdc++-v3 tests fail to link on AArch64 tiny memory model.

Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org NA-UNRESOLVED: 22_locale/money_get/get/char/14.cc compilation failed to produce executable PASS-NA: 22_locale/money_get/get/char/14.cc execution test NA

[Bug libstdc++/64443] New std::string implementation breaks tests on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64443 --- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) This commit seems to be breaking libstdc++-v3 runs on AArch64. Is this under Linux or with newlib? It works fine under Linux.

[Bug libstdc++/64443] New std::string implementation breaks tests on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64443 --- Comment #5 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Tejas Belagod from comment #3) (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) This commit seems to be breaking libstdc++-v3 runs on AArch64. Is this under Linux

[Bug target/64456] New: [AArch64] pr64252.c fail on aarch64_be

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This new test fails for BE: FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr64252.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr64252.c execution test but it is fixed by this patch series: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc

[Bug libstdc++/64443] New: New std::string implementation breaks tests on AArch64.

Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This commit seems to be breaking libstdc++-v3 runs on AArch64. Author: redi redi@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 Date: Fri Dec 19 18:16:39 2014 + New

[Bug libstdc++/64438] Removing string-conversion requirement causes libstdc++-v3 fails on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64438 --- Comment #2 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) That's strange, it should only affect targets that define _GLIBCXX_HAVE_BROKEN_VSWPRINTF i.e. only mingw What are the full errors

[Bug libstdc++/64443] New std::string implementation breaks tests on AArch64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64443 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) This commit seems to be breaking libstdc++-v3 runs on AArch64. Is this under Linux or with newlib? newlib. When run on a fast-model

[Bug middle-end/64448] New: New middle-end pattern breaks vector BIF folding on AArch64.

Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This new pattern Author: mpolacek mpolacek@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 Date: Wed Dec 17 11:48:33 2014 + PR middle-end/63568 match.pd: Add (x

[Bug libstdc++/64438] New: Removing string-conversion requirement causes libstdc++-v3 fails on AArch64.

: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01780.html causes UNSUPPORTED tests to get compiled on AArch64. FAIL: 21_strings

[Bug testsuite/64328] addr_equal-1.c fails execution.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64328 --- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: belagod Date: Wed Dec 17 12:15:36 2014 New Revision: 218817 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218817root=gccview=rev Log: PR testsuite/64328 * gcc.dg/addr_equal

[Bug testsuite/64328] addr_equal-1.c fails execution.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64328 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug tree-optimization/64328] New: addr_equal-1.c fails execution.

Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org FAIL: gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c execution test $ aarch64-none-elf-gcc /work/dev/arm/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c -O2 -lm -mcmodel=tiny -fPIC -o foo.exe fails on AArch64. This test

[Bug testsuite/64328] addr_equal-1.c fails execution.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64328 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2) Indeed, the testcase is meant to be nopic. I will check how to test for that in dg. Honza { dg-require-effective-target nonpic } ?

[Bug target/64231] [5 Regression] SIGSEGV building glibc on aarch64-linux-gnu from r217852

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64231 --- Comment #8 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hi Sandra, I'm unable to reproduce this SEGV with a x-build of aarch64-linux-gcc/native gcc with -O2 on the attached prepocessed test case. Are there any other options I'm missing?

[Bug target/63975] some of the builtin-arith-overflow* fail on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63975 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug testsuite/64032] [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/undefined-loop-2.c (test for warnings, line 18)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64032 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc

[Bug target/64240] New: [5.0 Regression][AArch64] SMS-3.c causes runtime exception(segfault) with -fPIC.

: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org When sms-3 is compiled with -fPIC for aarch64, the test itself segfaults during execution. ../../bin/install/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc

[Bug target/64240] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] SMS-3.c causes runtime exception(segfault).

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64240 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5.0 Regression][AArch64] |[5.0

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #17 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- - /* Do a block move either if the size is so small as to make each individual move a sub-unit move on average, or if it -is so large

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #11 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8) (In reply to Tejas Belagod from comment #7) I tried this, but it still doesn't seem to fold for aarch64. So, here is the DOM

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #13 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12) On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, belagod at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #11

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #7 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- I tried this, but it still doesn't seem to fold for aarch64. So, here is the DOM trace for aarch64: Optimizing statement a = *.LC0; LKUP STMT a = *.LC0 with .MEM_3(D) LKUP STMT

[Bug target/58692] aarch64 arm_neon.h functions are not documented

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58692 --- Comment #2 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Committed fix r217405 and r217406. r217406 | belagod | 2014-11-12 08:46:05 + (Wed, 12 Nov 2014) | 14

[Bug target/58692] aarch64 arm_neon.h functions are not documented

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58692 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #5 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Index: passes.def === --- passes.def (revision 217035) +++ passes.def (working copy) @@ -255,7 +255,7

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #2 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- foo.c.optimized: 5.0: ;;prev block 0, next block 1, flags: (NEW, REACHABLE) ;;pred: ENTRY [100.0%] (FALLTHRU,EXECUTABLE) # .MEM_4 = VDEF .MEM_3(D) aD.1380

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- When I try 5.0 with -fno-tree-vectorize, I get: ;; basic block 2, loop depth 0 ;;pred: ENTRY # .MEM_4 = VDEF .MEM_3(D) aD.2496 = *.LC0D.2503; # VUSE .MEM_4 _10

[Bug target/63679] [5.0 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63679 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64

[Bug tree-optimization/63677] New: Failure to constant fold with vectorization.

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org This piece of code: int __attribute__ ((noinline)) foo () { const int a[8] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 }; int i, sum; sum = 0; for (i = 0; i sizeof (a) / sizeof (*a); i++) sum

[Bug target/63679] New: [4.9 Regression][AArch64] Failure to constant fold.

: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org When this piece of code is compiled with -O3 -mgeneral-regs-only int __attribute__ ((noinline)) foo () { const int a[8] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 }; int i, sum; sum = 0; for (i = 0

[Bug tree-optimization/63677] Failure to constant fold with vectorization.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63677 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- There is similar behaviour on aarch64. So, it doesn't look like a backend issue.

[Bug rtl-optimization/60079] [LRA] ICE when compiling attached case.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60079 --- Comment #4 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #3) I can't reproduce this with current trunk either. Tejas, do you think this can be closed? I remember the ICE was quite sensitive to any

[Bug target/58692] aarch64 arm_neon.h functions are not documented

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58692 Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||belagod at gcc

[Bug tree-optimization/61114] Scalar evolution hides a big-endian const-folding bug.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61114 --- Comment #3 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks for the clarification. In that case, what element does bit positions 96..127 correspond to in { 120, 0, 0, 0 }?

[Bug tree-optimization/61114] Scalar evolution hides a big-endian const-folding bug.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61114 --- Comment #5 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- So, does that mean the folded value 120 is in the wrong place? The fix that I'm testing swaps the first and last elements of the const vector {120, 0, 0, 0}. PS: Sorry, my statement

[Bug tree-optimization/61114] New: Scalar evolution hides a big-endian const-folding bug.

Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org When this piece of code is compiled with int foo () { short i; int sum = 0; for (i=0;i16;i++) sum += i; return sum; } cc1 -O2 -ftree-vectorize -fno-tree-scev

[Bug tree-optimization/61114] Scalar evolution hides a big-endian const-folding bug.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61114 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Sorry I meant it fixes this on aarch64_be. FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-7.c execution test

[Bug rtl-optimization/60079] [LRA] ICE when compiling attached case.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60079 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 32053 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32053action=edit Reduced test case for LRA ICE.

[Bug rtl-optimization/60079] New: [LRA] ICE when compiling attached case.

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org When the attached case is compiled with -O2 for AArch64, LRA ICEs thus: $ ../install/bin/aarch64-none-elf-gcc -O2 besttry.c -c besttry.c: In function 'ripemd160_block_data_order': besttry.c:936

[Bug fortran/59959] [Regression 4.9] LRA ICEs on a fortran case(Suspected to be similar to pr59915)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59959 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- My aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gfortran is configrued with: /src/gcc/configure --target=aarch64-none-linux-gnu --prefix= --with-sysroot=/aarch64-none-linux-gnu/libc --with-build-sysroot

[Bug fortran/59959] [Regression 4.9] LRA ICEs on a fortran case(Suspected to be similar to pr59915)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59959 --- Comment #2 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- Looks like the same LRA issues are causing libgomp.fortran tests to ICE: /aarch64-none-linux-gnu/obj/gcc4/gcc/xgcc -B/aarch64-none-linux-gnu/obj/gcc4/gcc/ src/gcc/libgomp/testsuite

[Bug fortran/59959] New: [Regression 4.9] LRA ICEs on a fortran case(Suspected to be similar to pr59915)

: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org Hi, On AArch64, I'm seeing a fortran regression that I get when I compile: .../aarch64-none-linux-gnu/obj/gcc4/gcc/testsuite/gfortran3

[Bug regression/59915] New: [LRA, Regression 4.9] LRA ICE - Repeated looping over subreg reloads (gcc.c-torture/compile/simd-3.c)

: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: regression Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: belagod at gcc dot gnu.org On AArch64, when gcc.c-torture/compile/simd-3.c is compiled with -O1, it generates an ICE. tempf Analyzing

[Bug regression/59915] [LRA, Regression 4.9] LRA ICE - Repeated looping over subreg reloads (gcc.c-torture/compile/simd-3.c)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59915 --- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod belagod at gcc dot gnu.org --- This regression was introduced with I committed a more relaxed version of CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS for aarch64. 2014-01-20 Tejas Belagod tejas.bela...@arm.com * config

  1   2   >