https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #18 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Qing Zhao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:429e3b7d8bf6609ddf7c7b1e49244997e9ac76b8
commit r12-4829-g429e3b7d8bf6609ddf7c7b1e49244997e9ac76b8
Author: Oracle Public Cloud User
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #16 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 51662
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51662=edit
proposed patch to gcc12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #15 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A summary of this bug based on discussion and more study:
multiple issues in the current implemenation:
A. should check is_gimple_reg before adding the call to
__builtin_clear_padding;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #14 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
All the 3 testing cases can be resolved by adding the following patch (check
whether the type has padding before adding call to __builtin_clear_padding):
I believe that this is a safe partial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #13 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 51593
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51593=edit
C++ source code
Third test case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #12 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> and if you have a variable that isn't addressable, you need to figure out
> what to do. I think it might be easiest not to clear anything, another
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #11 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Sure, you can, but just note that it is conservative and fast, it will
> return true even for types that don't have any padding.
> But for double,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #10 from Qing Zhao ---
> On Oct 11, 2021, at 3:29 PM, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to qinzhao from comment #7)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 51587
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51587=edit
C++ source code
Another test case derived from compiling fedora source code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #7)
> I agree that the above additional check is necessary.
>
> one question here is, can I use the routine "bool
> clear_padding_type_may_have_padding_p (tree type)" in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #7 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> __builtin_clear_padding when folded emits a series of memory stores rather
> than BIT_INSERT_EXPR etc., so that wouldn't work.
> But, IMNSHO,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5)
> But then we still cannot do the GIMPLE this way. It's a case where
> it is problematic to mark something as address-taken when some
> gimplification
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #3)
> > I doubt we support vectors of long double, so it is mainly whether
> > returning of
> > long double or _Complex long double works fine.
>
> for this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> __builtin_clear_padding when folded emits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
__builtin_clear_padding when folded emits a series of memory stores rather than
BIT_INSERT_EXPR etc., so that wouldn't work.
But, IMNSHO, -ftrivial-auto-var-init* shouldn't be adding
__builtin_clear_padding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
19 matches
Mail list logo
