https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113490
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cytv3eyy.fsf@/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
--- Comment #28 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #27)
> The original article checked gcc-10.
> gcc-13 is checked in the following article:
>
> https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1067/
>
> I suspect it would
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Still, let me have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110422
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed on trunk, I plan to backport to open release branches in the upcoming
weeks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 94629, which changed state.
Bug 94629 Summary: 10 issues located by the PVS-studio static analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112616
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> # q_11 = PHI <0B(2), removed_return.14_14(D)(4),
> removed_return.14_14(D)(3)>
> _12 = *q_11;
>
>
> WTF
Well, _12 is not used anywhere, so the code ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
I have submitted a slightly modified patch to the mailing list:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cyu1e9kw.fsf@/T/#u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 113296, which changed state.
Bug 113296 Summary: [14 Regression] SPEC 2006 434.zeusmp segfaults on Aarch64
when built with -Ofast -march=native -flto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113296
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113178
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107823
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109744
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109780
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #26 from Martin Jambor --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109823
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109828
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109918
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110001
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110065
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110091
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110294
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
This has been fixed with r14-4141-gbf6b107e2a3423 (Andrew MacLeod: New early
__builtin_unreachable processing).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110705
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110768
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110842
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110941
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
This has been fixed with r14-5109-ga291237b628f41 (Andrew MacLeod: Remove
simple ranges from trailing zero bitmasks.)
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
This has been fixed with r14-4786-gd118738e71cf46 (Richi's restrict invariant
motion of shifts).
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
This has been fixed with Richi's r14-3982-g9ea74d235c7e78 ( better DCE after
forwprop). Given the tit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111291
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|mjambor at suse dot cz |mikael at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
The testcase has been fixed with r14-4141-gbf6b107e2a3423 (New early
__builtin_unreachable processing.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: aarch64-linux
Target: aarch64-linux
Our Aarch64
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: aarch64-linux
Target: aarch64-linux
Our Aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #13 from Martin Jambor ---
The testcase below segfaults when compiled with master configured with
release checking. However, it is very likely affected by this bug (it
fails with checking compiler like testcases for this issue do) a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112616
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
||2024-01-05
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
This has been introduced with r14-6822-g01f4251b8775c8
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #34 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #32)
> > /tmp/build/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h:437:
> > warning: 'void* __builtin_memcpy(void*, const void*, long unsigned int)'
> > w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112822
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Thank you, I have proposed the patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-December/640356.html
If it is approved, I'd also like you to add the testcase to the testsuite as a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112822
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
The following should fix it. I'll try a bit more to come up with a testcase
that would not require __builtin_vec_vsx_st but so far my simple attempts
failed.
diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.cc b/gcc/tree-sra.c
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Mine.
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: aarch64-linux
Target: aarch64-linux
At some point between r14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88345
--- Comment #22 from Martin Jambor ---
Just to clarify, the case where this causes us problems is (indeed on Aarch64)
with option -fpatchable-function-entry (and NOT necessarily -flive-patching).
But I agree that a separate orthogonal option for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112711
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112721
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112697
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 56720
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56720&action=edit
Perf annotate of milc built with r14-4972-g8aa47713701b1f
commit r14-4972-g8aa47713701b1f:
$ perf stat taskse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112697
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 56719
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56719&action=edit
Perf annotate of milc built with r14-4971-g0beb1611754742
commit r14-4971-g0beb1611754742:
$ perf stat taskse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #27 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #26)
> (In reply to GCC Commits from comment #23)
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aae723d360ca26cd9fd0b039fb0a616bd0eae363
> >
> > commit r14-5831-gaae723d360ca26cd9fd0b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112711
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/638318.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112721
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/638318.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112721
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Possibly fails to handle RETURNS_ARG_*?
Most likely. Mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112697
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109849
--- Comment #25 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> There is nothing to sink really, loop header copying introduces a PHI and
> there's not partial redundancies but only partial-partial and those are not
> obvio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108351
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111844
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> It seems to me this is a task for SRA (again...) which should be more
> forgiving to select stmts requiring address-taking of locals but only
> when they are n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 110302, which changed state.
Bug 110302 Summary: libquantum regression on zen3 with LTO and PGO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110302
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110302
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111572
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Hmm, this works on the trunk now. Would be a good idea to figure out what
> "fixed" it.
If my simple test is correct, the error disappeared with
r14-4790-g96923
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111878
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I am not 100% certain if it is the same bug (I am happy to open a separate bug
report if not), but I'm getting an ICE on the same spot, also with graphite,
when running
gfortran ~/gcc/trunk/src/libgomp/test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 57, which changed state.
Bug 57 Summary: [14 Regression] 416.gamess fails with a run-time abort when
compiled with -O2 -flto after r14-3226-gd073e2d75d9ed4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: aburgess at gcc dot gnu.or
oduct: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: chenxiaolong at loongson dot cn
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111922
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a fix on the mailing list consisting of:
- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/632042.html and
- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/632044.html
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 regression] bootstrap |[14 regression] bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
Yeah, that seems to be it. If I cannot fix this tomorrow I'll revert the patch
from master.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
I made a mistake checking out the correct commit, so please disregard comment
#1, I'm trying again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111688
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
I was not able to reproduce this error on gcc112 on compile farm
(powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111610
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #1)
> As a matter of record, we do not really support cross-compilers targeting an
> unknown Darwin version (the idea of xxx-apple-darwin [without a specific
> version]
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin
We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110148
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 110148, which changed state.
Bug 110148 Summary: [14 Regression] TSVC s242 regression between
g:c0df96b3cda5738afbba3a65bb054183c5cd5530 and
g:e4c986fde56a6248f8fbe6cf0704e1da34b055d8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
Clearly mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110148
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
I believe this has been fixed?
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org, fkastl at suse dot cz
Blocks: 86656
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108007
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||19373742 at buaa dot edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111490
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
Target: ppc64le-linux-gnu
With a cross compiler
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: crazylht at gmail dot com, fkastl at suse dot cz
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #4)
> So here ipa-modref declares the field dead, while ipa-prop determines its
> value even if it is unused and makes it used later?
This is what I wanted to ask about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> I think if IPA modref declares the argument dead at the call site then IPA
> CP/SRA cannot declare it known constant.
It is declared "killed" by the function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
Simple C testcase:
-- pr57_0.c --
/* { dg-lto-do run } */
/* { dg-lto-options { { -O2 -flto=auto } } } */
/* { dg-extra-ld-options { -flto-partition=1to1 } } */
extern __attribute__((no
dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2023-08-25
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
With the propagation, PRE performs the following:
void point.constprop.isra (double ISRA.1740
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57
--- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor ---
interestingly, the issue goes away with -flto-partition=one
It is triggered by propagating 0 as the last parameter of point.constprop.isra
which however looks correct, all four calls to the function (in dif
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64
,
||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
There was also a 7.7% regression on zen3 with generic march (these measurements
are without LTO):
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=466.120.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97807
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I believe our tester has hit this again recently:
arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc
/home/worker/buildworker/tiber-option-juggler/build/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/packed-aligned-1.c
-mcpu=cortex-r4f -fno-tree-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111088
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78790
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Bug 103227 depends on bug 92497, which changed state.
Bug 92497 Summary: Aggregate IPA-CP and inlining do not play well together,
transformation is lost
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92497
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92497
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
101 - 200 of 2265 matches
Mail list logo
