https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113178
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 113237, which changed state.
Bug 113237 Summary: [14 Regression] ICE verify_ssa failed when building
500.perlbench_r since r14-6822-g01f4251b8775c8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113172
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #15 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #14)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #13)
> > Patch submitted
>
> Two weeks have elapsed and the patch doesn't seem to appear in git.
>
> Is it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113319
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113319
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90608
--- Comment #18 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #16)
> This missed the gcc stage 1 deadline, but I'm still working on it.
Thanks Mikael! If I can help with anything do let me know :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112468
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113287
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113287
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 57023
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57023=edit
branch_check.patch
Patch undergoing testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #15 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #13)
> The testcase below segfaults when compiled with master configured with
> release checking. However, it is very likely affected by this bug (it
> fails with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #14 from Tamar Christina ---
Yeah I'll test. Richi approved the fix today and I'll commit after a final
regtest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113287
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, definitely mine :)
I've miss identified that the exit doesn't leave the loop.
Quick hack fixes the issue. I'll work on a proper one tomorrow morning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113287
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113290
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113290
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113290
Bug ID: 113290
Summary: Optimize dominator updated for peeling with multiple
exits
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113267
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> (In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #10)
> > Created attachment 57009 [details]
> > simpler testcase using _BitInt()
> >
> > $ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113267
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113267
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113267
Bug ID: 113267
Summary: pragma novector ICEs when no loop condition
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 57003
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57003=edit
perlbench.patch
submitted patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
*** Bug 113145 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 113145, which changed state.
Bug 113145 Summary: [14 regression] ICE in verify_dominators when building
mit-krb5-1.21.2 since r14-6822-g01f4251b8775c8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113145
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113145
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
Ah wait, I see. Ok, taking a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113237
--- Comment #1 from Tamar Christina ---
> I have bisected the failure to r14-6822-g01f4251b8775c8 (middle-end: Support
> vectorization of loops with multiple exits). I have tried if the patch
> attached to PR 113137 helps but unfortunately it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113116
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 56980
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56980=edit
submitted-patch.patch
Have submitted this to list. thanks for report!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113199
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #11)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> > This seems to happen because the vectorizer decides to use partial vectors
> > to vectorize the loop and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113178
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113172
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch submitted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch submitted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch submitted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
--- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch submitted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #13 from Tamar Christina ---
Patch submitted
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113172
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110625
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113169
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113171
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113171
Bug ID: 113171
Summary: Unneeded zero extend after widening load with SVE
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
ok, x86_64 bootstrap and regtest with -O3 and --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra
now passes.
aarch64 hit a small issue in libgcc that I'm not sure I should be allowing or
not. will investigate and either
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 56963
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56963=edit
maintain-lcssa-peeled.patch
patch undergoing testing for both this and PR113136
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113167
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, so this bug is simply fixed by:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index f51ae3e719e..e7a5917bc4c 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -976,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, have a working patch but it's a bit ugly, working on cleaning it up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 56959
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56959=edit
nonlinear IV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Hmm so can't seem to reproduce it with x86_64 or aarch64.
let me build a --target=amdgcn-amdhsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks, taking a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #16 from Tamar Christina ---
>
> I wonder whether ARM SVE can also use this approach VEC_EXTRACT with index =
> 0.
Perhaps, I'll look into it thanks. though this is ofcourse only applicable when
the mask comes from whilelo.
In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #15 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #14)
> > > > sure, but you can't use BIT_FIELD_REF on VLA vectors.
> > >
> > > So, for length partial vector. We can use VEC_EXTRACT with index = 0 since
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #13 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #12)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #11)
> > (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #10)
> > > (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9)
> > > > (In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #11 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #10)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9)
> > (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #8)
> > > Suppose the loop mask is generated by whilelo instruction of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #9 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #8)
> Suppose the loop mask is generated by whilelo instruction of ARM SVE.
>
> Suppose we have 8 elements in a single whole vector.
>
> mask = whilo (0, res) if res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
You may be able to use the same approach as
else if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo))
that is, reverse both the mask and the vector and using extract last.
It's not going to be performance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #5)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #4)
> > (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #3)
> > > I guess this code is just disabling partial vector for length
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #3)
> I guess this code is just disabling partial vector for length for now.
>
> And need me to test and port this part for length in the followup patches.
>
> Am I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2023-12-25 00:00:00 |2023-12-27
Summary|Middle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks, was able to reproduce with `--enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra`.
The issue seems to be that the value is unused, and we were relying on DSE
removing such statement. but with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #6)
> Can you try with --enable-checking=yes,rtl,extra? I can reproduce this on
> godbolt too: https://godbolt.org/z/56r9ejMn5.
trying with that.. from the dump on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
Have update the memory analysis part to support inverted loops. now working on
wiring through virtual phis during peeling.
Aside form this missing part CFG looks correct. will have a final patch in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
hmm I seem unable to reproduce this one..
tnfchris@x86_64 ~/gcc-peak> ./install/bin/gcc -O3 pr113136.c -c -march=znver2
pr113136.c: In function ‘yyl_try_d’:
pr113136.c:16:14: warning: comparison of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Created attachment 56954
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56954=edit
candidate-patch1.patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
Loop seems to have been peeled and versioned, and has very convoluted sequence
of merge blocks for the exits.
I initially thought it would be enough to update the immediate reachable blocks
from the new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110625
--- Comment #23 from Tamar Christina ---
Found the costing bug and have a patch undergoing testing.
Will post tomorrow. Sorry for the delay in fixing it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #5 from Tamar Christina ---
Simpler reproducer:
int b;
void a() __attribute__((__noreturn__));
void c() {
char *buf;
int bufsz = 64;
while (b) {
!bufsz ? a(), 0 : *buf++ = bufsz--;
b -= 4;
}
}
The loop has an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113144
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
loop has weird shape, peeling should have recalculated all dominators but seems
to have missed one.
Will fix tomorrow when back at work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113136
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
This shouldn't have vectorized as outer-loop vectorization isn't supported. In
addition switch statements are not supported, but I guess the nested if
confused the code doing the analysis.
Will fix when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
*** Bug 113135 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113139
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113135
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #2 from Tamar Christina ---
*** Bug 113146 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113137
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
*** Bug 113139 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113146
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-25
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113132
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112468
--- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
Hi,
It's not forgotten. I've agreed on a fix with the maintainers that should solve
a bunch of other (older) issues with copysign as well.
Since it's a bug fix it's on my list after my stage3 changes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110625
--- Comment #22 from Tamar Christina ---
Bisected the remaining regression to:
dd86a5a69cbda40cf76388a65d3317c91cb2b501 is the first bad commit
commit dd86a5a69cbda40cf76388a65d3317c91cb2b501
Author: Richard Biener
Date: Thu Jun 22 11:40:46
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112981
Bug ID: 112981
Summary: [13/14 Regression] Big compile time and run time
regression in libasan with
g:f732bf6a603721f61102a08ad2d023c7c2670870
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110625
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[AArch64] Vect: SLP fails |[14 Regression][AArch64]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112882
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Awesome! Thanks for taking a look!
> > It seems that undefining `_GLIBCXX_VERBOSE_ASSERT` gets it to go to
> > `__builtin_abort()` which makes it work again.
> >
> > If this change was intentional,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112882
Bug ID: 112882
Summary: [14 Regression] std::clamp no longer usable in header
only mode
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tnfchris at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112644
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
Matthew has been working on this and so far has concluded:
Summary of main problem:
New libhwasan runtime libraries have added interceptors for various mem*, str*
functions (and I think others -- I do
201 - 300 of 768 matches
Mail list logo
