https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #14 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
@Richard
I've uploaded the generated *.ii files (-save-temps), as discussed with
upstream:
* https://github.com/google/highway/issues/776#issuecomment-1177864014
I do not know the codebase very well
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #13 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 53277
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53277&action=edit
gcc-12 -save-temps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53271|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #10 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I did upload the bad (gcc-11) and the good (gcc-12) object files. Not sure if
this is what was expected. In any case let me know if you want to provide more
info.
% gdb -batch -ex "disassemble/rs _ZN3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Created attachment 53271
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53271&action=edit
object files compiled using gcc or gcc12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Jan Wassenberg from comment #7)
> The easiest way to reduce the amount of code in the binary is to comment out
> from mul_test.cc all the HWY_EXPORT_AND_TEST_P except the one with
> TestAllM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #6 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Does it work with -fstrict-aliasing ?
Yes with and without valgrind I can reproduce the assert.
> Does adding -fsanitize=address report anything?
When I u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
> I can trigger an assertion in highway unit test suite on armhf when using -O2
> (does not happen at -O0).
The above sentence is wrong, I can make the symptoms go away using:
CXXFLAGS=-fsanitize=unde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
g++-10 seems affected:
% g++-10 --version
g++-10 (Debian 10.4.0-1) 10.4.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Ok it seems to be working ok using:
% g++-12 --version
g++-12 (Debian 12.1.0-5) 12.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106187
Bug ID: 106187
Summary: armhf: Miscompilation with -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102466
--- Comment #4 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I can reproduce it using -Wall -fsanitize=undefined -O2
* https://github.com/malaterre/PublicRep/tree/master/gcc/libjxl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102466
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #2)
> > I've downgraded binutils to version from bullseye, and I am getting the
> > exact same symptoms:
>
> Did
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Dear John,
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #6)
> For context, see:
> https://github.com/smuellerDD/libkcapi/issues/133#issuecomment-1024349323
>
> Note that the following commit fixes the s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Original description states:
> Steps using gcc-10 (Debian/buster):
This is a typo, it should states:
> Steps using gcc-10 (Debian/bullseye):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
--- Comment #2 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
I've downgraded binutils to version from bullseye, and I am getting the exact
same symptoms:
```
libtool: link: ( cd ".libs" && rm -f "libkcapi.la" && ln -s "../libkcapi.la"
"libkcapi.la" )
/bin/bash ./
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104363
Bug ID: 104363
Summary: hppa: __asm__ directive .global and multiple .symver
not supported
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
@Andreas the specific issue I am raising is the difference between the approach
of riscv vs armel. The riscv team is taking the responsability for putting the
missing `-latomic`, while armel expect the u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
In case that help, cmake instructions for the test case is:
```
project(p C)
set(CMAKE_C_STANDARD 11)
add_library(foo STATIC foo.c)
add_executable(prog prog.c)
target_link_libraries(prog foo)
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
Bug ID: 104248
Summary: armel: C11 atomics requires to be linked with
libatomic.a explicitly
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #9 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Compiling the reduce test case without pthread lead to some kind of exception:
```
(gdb) bt full
#0 __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:49
set = {__val = {0 , 824
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #8 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
% more CMakeLists.txt main.cc Module.cc openvdb.cc Tree.h
::
CMakeLists.txt
::
cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 3.13)
project(p)
# only export limited set of symbols
set(CMAKE_C_V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #7 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > > (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #3)
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #5 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Mathieu Malaterre from comment #3)
> > $ export CXXFLAGS=-fvisibility=hidden
>
> Yes you can't just use -fvisibility=hidden without the source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Steps to reproduce without a full Debian environement:
```
$ wget
http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/openvdb/openvdb_8.1.0.orig.tar.xz
$ tar xf openvdb_8.1.0.orig.tar.xz
$ cd openvdb-8.1.0
$ mkdir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103629
Bug ID: 103629
Summary: Possible miscompilation triggered by
-fvisibility=hidden
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 103159, which changed state.
Bug 103159 Summary: Some -Wuninitialized warnings still depend on optimization
level -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Please note that the documentation currently does not detail the need/impact of
optimization for this flag:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wuninitialized
Maybe just upd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Just to be sure, here is the actual command I had been starring at for a while:
```
% g++ -o undef -fsanitize=undefined -Wuninitialized undef.cxx && ./undef
21845
```
Maybe I got confused with `-fsanit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103159
Bug ID: 103159
Summary: -Wuninitialized should not depend on optimization
level
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103077
Bug ID: 103077
Summary: This flag is enabled by default at -O3 and by
-ftree-vectorize
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68891
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Here is the output from clang++:
error: cannot specify any part of a return type in the declaration of a
conversion function; use a typedef to declare a conversion to 'double (&)[3]'
% clang++ --versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71617
Mathieu Malaterre changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
36 matches
Mail list logo
