https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81423
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> There are a few issues here.
>
> 1) I cannot reproduce it: a trunk x86_64-linux compiler stores to
> memory in that insn 20 (the testcase from comment 3).
Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81418
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Hrm. So whenever a reducing pattern is exercised in the reduction "chain" we
cannot handle regular uses of the PHI as we basically have to force a
single_defuse_cycle.
So we can't vectorize this case but w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
>
> Bernd Edlinger changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81443
--- Comment #2 from Joshua Kinard ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> What file is it compiling?
As far as I can tell, it looks somewhat random. I initially thought that
'build/genrecog.o' was a single file, but after several re-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
Right, sorry about the ubsan dependency screwup. I'll move the test case later
today.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81441
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28859
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79162
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28859
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28859
>
> Martin Liška changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28859
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Yep, let's forget about it ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
It's a typical x87 code, where registers have better precision that a double.
Thus adding -ffloat-store fixed the test-case, I'll send a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41771&action=edit
Patch candidate
Can you please test the attached patch on Pentium 2 machine?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
felix changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||felix.von.s at posteo dot de
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comment on attachment 41771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41771
Patch candidate
I don't think we want to add -ffloat-store unconditionally, only for targets
that really need it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81461
--- Comment #2 from Antony Polukhin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> jump threading
Thanks, now I know hot the transformation of
for (;it != end && it != *chunks + 128; ++it) {
sum += *it;
}
into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
--- Comment #8 from owner at bugs dot debian.org ---
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this Bug report.
This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.
Your message is be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Comment on attachment 41771 [details]
> Patch candidate
>
> I don't think we want to add -ffloat-store unconditionally, only for targets
> that really need it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70140
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41772
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41772&action=edit
Patch candidate
I'm going to prepare some test-cases for that. Does it look good?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81462
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81466
Bug ID: 81466
Summary: [SH]: Error: syntax error in @(disp,[Rn, gbr, pc])
when building with -mlra
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
URL: https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63361
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
grep FLT_EVAL_METHOD config/*/*
says the only problematic arches are i?86, s390*, m68k*, arm and maybe aarch64.
add-ieee-options has just i?86 and m68k (clearly wrong, because it really
should
not use
[istar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81466
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 41775
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41775&action=edit
Generated assembly for MapPrototype.cpp (gzipped)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81426
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #5)
> This sounds like a different issue. Can you please create another PR for
> that with the title "syntax error in @(disp,[Rn, gbr, pc]) when compiling
> wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70992
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81442
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cesar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81443
--- Comment #3 from Joshua Kinard ---
It's just build/genrecog.c. I had a stale build environment file that was
still sending "-j3" to 'make'. I fixed that and restarted from where it last
left off, and it gets to genrecog.c and spent about ~20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46742
--- Comment #4 from Franz Sirl ---
APPEARS_TO_BE_BOOLEAN_EXPR_P was introduced with r141340 (PR 7543), but I
cannot find a discussion on why this suppression makes sense. When I disable it
I only see 3 places where it triggers in trunk:
gcc/cp/l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70992
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81462
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81453
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81403
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So this is during partial-PRE insertion where after PRE insertion of
Found partial redundancy for expression {bit_not_expr,_13} (0020)
Inserted _33 = ~_3;
in predecessor 5 (0014)
Created phi prephitmp_34 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81403
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Kind-of a duplicate of PR80620 as well. Testing a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81442
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to cesar from comment #4)
> I posted a patch that fixes this issue on July 13, 2017:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00750.html
>
> It is pending review.
Assuming this is indeed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46742
--- Comment #5 from Franz Sirl ---
Actually, after seeing a large bunch of justified warnings in our codebase with
the disabled APPEARS_TO_BE_BOOLEAN_EXPR_P check, I wonder if a new option like
-Wbool-bitwise-parentheses (thus not depending on th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81464
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Minimal example:
...
program main
implicit none
real, dimension(:,:),allocatable :: a, b, c
real :: sm
allocate (a(2,2), b(2,2), c(2,2))
call random_number(a)
call random_number(b)
c = matmul(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71681
Andris Pavenis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70140
--- Comment #7 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> Created attachment 41772 [details]
> Patch candidate
>
> I'm going to prepare some test-cases for that. Does it look good?
Yes, it now inlines small constant sizes. Howe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52992
Andris Pavenis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81456
--- Comment #2 from James Greenhalgh ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Confirmed, started with r238594.
The cost model relies on the target giving a reasonable approximation for an
instruction size through ix86_rtx_costs.
The bas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81467
Bug ID: 81467
Summary: AVX-512 support for inline assembly
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81393
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81468
Bug ID: 81468
Summary: is_constructible gives the wrong answer for time_point
construction
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81469
Bug ID: 81469
Summary: std::uncaught_exception should be marked as deprecated
for C++1z
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81470
Bug ID: 81470
Summary: [8 Regression] Bootstrap comparison failures in
gcc/ada
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
Bug ID: 81471
Summary: internal compiler error: in curr_insn_transform, at
lra-constraints.c:3495
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81469
emi_cuenca at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||emi_cuenca at hotmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81345
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|7.1.0 |8.0
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:12:11 2017
New Revision: 250284
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250284&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-07-17 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/81162
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81468
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler ---
It seems that the implementation simply forgot to constrain overload
resolution, since this is the complete definition of the affected constructor:
template
constexpr time_point(const time_point& __t)
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 41776
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41776&action=edit
Assembler for fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 41777
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41777&action=edit
Assembler for works
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking at the difference in generated code. The more recent (failing) builds
are generating a whole bunch of vector ops where the old (working) code did
not.
< failing code (r250280)
> last wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
The code is being vectorized in the "fails" dump and not being vectorized in
the "works" dump. This cannot be due to r249424, which does gimple folding on
some Power-specific built-ins, for this is a generic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Gian-Carlo Pascutto from comment #0)
> In another module there is:
Please provide a compilable source file (preferably minimized) that triggers
the ICE, as instructed in [1].
[1] https://gcc.gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81225
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:38:29 2017
New Revision: 250285
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250285&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-06-30 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81258
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:39:23 2017
New Revision: 250286
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250286&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-07-04 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81066
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:41:08 2017
New Revision: 250287
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250287&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2017-07-14 Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81365
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:42:37 2017
New Revision: 250288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250288&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81365
* tree-ssa-phiprop.c (propagate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
Doesn't reproduce for powerpc64le. I'll have to build a cross.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
--- Comment #2 from Gian-Carlo Pascutto ---
#include
inline uint32_t rotl(const uint32_t x, const int k) {
return (x << k) | (x >> (32 - k));
}
uint64_t s[2];
uint64_t random(void) {
const uint64_t s0 = s[0];
uint64_t s1 = s[1];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81428
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 19:45:59 2017
New Revision: 250289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250289&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81428
* match.pd (X / X -> one): Don'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
--- Comment #3 from Gian-Carlo Pascutto ---
Note the flags, -march=native in this case was Intel Haswell.
-O3 -march=haswell is required to trigger this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
--- Comment #4 from Gian-Carlo Pascutto ---
Further reduced testcase:
#include
uint64_t f(uint64_t x) {
return ((uint32_t)x << 55) | ((uint32_t)x >> -23);
}
This makes it more clear the code is UB, but AFAIK a compiler ICE doesn't fall
un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Gian-Carlo Pascutto from comment #4)
> Further reduced testcase:
>
> #include
>
> uint64_t f(uint64_t x) {
> return ((uint32_t)x << 55) | ((uint32_t)x >> -23);
> }
>
> This makes it more cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81471
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ra |
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #6 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So here is comparing 249423 (works) with 249424 (fails):
seurer@genoa:~/gcc/build/gcc-test2$ svn info $GCC_SRC
. . .
Revision: 249423
. . .
seurer@genoa:~/gcc/build/gcc-test2$ /home/seurer/gcc/bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carll at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81386
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Carl, please revert the patch until you have time to investigate. This will
cause havoc every time we vectorize with these patterns.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #11)
> On Debian, after path canonicalization, this is /usr/lib/bfd-plugins, but
> only packages should manage files under /usr/lib (unlike /usr/local, for
> instance)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81459
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
> 3) Next combinations have been tested:
> > --enable-languages=c,ada
> > --enable-languages=c,c++,ada
This one should be fine. If this doesn't work, then use the system compiler
instead of GNAT GPL as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81455
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81456
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81354
>
> Martin Liška changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81460
Bug ID: 81460
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in force_constant_size, at
gimplify.c:684
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81460
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59521
Yuri Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41737|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81461
Bug ID: 81461
Summary: Optimization for removing same variable comparisons in
loop: while(it != end1 && it != end2)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81069
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Jul 17 07:49:22 2017
New Revision: 250256
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250256&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Insert diverging jump alap in nvptx_single
2017-07-17 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81462
Bug ID: 81462
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in estimate_bb_frequencies at
gcc/predict.c:3546
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81376
Yuri Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tetra2005 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81463
Bug ID: 81463
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in scale_loop_profile at
gcc/cfgloopmanip.c:603
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81464
Bug ID: 81464
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in expand_omp_for_static_chunk, at
omp-expand.c:4236
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54123
Yuri Gribov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tetra2005 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81465
Bug ID: 81465
Summary: ICE in estimate_edge_growth at gcc/ipa-inline.h:85 on
s390x target
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81396
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 17 08:14:16 2017
New Revision: 250257
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250257&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81396
* tree-ssa-math-opts.c (struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54123
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81464
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81464
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81069
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Jul 17 08:56:06 2017
New Revision: 250258
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250258&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 80929
* config/avr/avr.c (avr_mul_highpart_cost): New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81323
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81324
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64-linux |powerpc64-linux,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81331
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Jul 17 09:06:39 2017
New Revision: 250259
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250259&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from 2017-07-17 trunk r250258.
PR 80929
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81342
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80929
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Jul 17 09:09:42 2017
New Revision: 250260
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250260&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from 2017-07-17 trunk r250258.
PR 80929
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
