Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
This example program compiles without any kind of warning in gcc:
static char x = 0xD8;
int main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108483
--- Comment #3 from Michael Karcher ---
Thanks for the pointer to #4210. Note that 4210 is slightly different, though.
In that report, the condition and the warnable expression are in different
statements, and https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 54318
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54318&action=edit
minimal exa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94504
--- Comment #5 from Michael Karcher ---
I got the command line of gcc wrong. "-pie" just sets the linker flags for PIE
linking, but it does *not* compile source code as PIE. If I use "-fpie",
garbage collection does what it is supposed to do.
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94504
--- Comment #3 from Michael Karcher ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Huh, looking at the assembly & the object file this seems to be fully a linker
> issue who seems to be responsible for building the GOT. I suggest to move
> t
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
I try to compile the following test program using
gcc -ffunction-sections
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
As noted while filing a bug on rustc because rustc does not correctly implement
the Sparc64 ABI regarding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79037
--- Comment #10 from Michael Karcher ---
OK, I got it. I retract my last comment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79037
--- Comment #8 from Michael Karcher ---
The patch looks like it should work fine, I guess John Paul Adrian Glaubitz is
going to test it soon. But I wonder whether the determination of alignment is
in types.cc really needed, as user-specified alig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79037
--- Comment #5 from Michael Karcher ---
The root issue now is that the ABI gcc implements on m68k is incompatible with
the Go runtime shipped with gcc.
The Go runtime uses the lowest two bits in the type information pointer as
flags (called PREC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 36537
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
--- Comment #16 from Michael Karcher ---
The bug seems to be quite similar to the infamous "sloth that was dropped on
the head as a baby"-bug Linus discovered (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/24/584 ,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=619
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67002
Michael Karcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot
dialu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #22 from Michael Karcher ---
OK, in that case I retract my objections and I think the patch is fine. I am
sorry for that mistake.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #20 from Michael Karcher ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #19)
> > The or-then-SImode-compare optimization has an adverse effect on the test
> > coverage, it seems. In both cases, GET_MODE(src_reg) and GET_MODE(dst_reg)
> > are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #18 from Michael Karcher ---
As I said, I did not try your patch, but just read the source. The assembly you
quoted convinces me that there is no problem in the code actually produced by
your patch, which is great. This is caused by t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #15 from Michael Karcher ---
I did not get around to test your proposed patch yet, but it seems like the new
"logical not" operation always compares only the low 32 bit against zero, even
if there is a 64 bit operand. If my analysis i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #12 from Michael Karcher ---
Further digging into this showed that there actually is a pass that would merge
the two "tst r1,r1" instructions - the jump2 pass in cfgclenup.c.
The optimization is called "crossjumping" in gcc, also kno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #11 from Michael Karcher ---
Putting things straight after trying it out:
(In reply to Michael Karcher from comment #7)
[...]
> and this gets (except SH2A with nott) transformed to (by
> define_insn_and_split "nott" in the machine de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #10 from Michael Karcher ---
Created attachment 33991
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33991&action=edit
Fix logical negation of registers, SImode only
In fact, it turns out, you were right. I implemented the solu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #8 from Michael Karcher ---
Actually, the whole issue got me curious - I will try prepare a different patch
along your suggestions and compare the compiler output. If I don't report back
today, I probably won't do that in time, so don
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #7 from Michael Karcher ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #6)
> > For the transformation to be valid, you would need a logical not instruction
> > instead of the bitwise not instruction that sets the desination register to
> > z
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
--- Comment #5 from Michael Karcher ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #4)
> I'm not sure about this. The first hunk of your patch that removes the
> example in the top comment block should be valid, as far as I can see at the
> moment. Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63783
Michael Karcher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot
dialu
24 matches
Mail list logo
