https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
--- Comment #14 from Fabian Groffen ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #13)
> If we could get in touch with an actual lawyer to review which laws
> specifically are getting in the way here, that could be helpful. I won my
> election to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Fabian Groffen from comment #14)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #13)
> > If we could get in touch with an actual lawyer to review which laws
> > specifically are getting in the way here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49520
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49520&action=edit
Numbers a, b so that 2^b ≡ 1 mod a up to b=64, larger b taken if several
solutions exist, plus the multiplicat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #5)
> I added xfail-if for powerpc-darwin (8,9, 10 and 11).
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2020-November/336720.html
>
> Since i don't think I will have time t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I plan to work on this early in stage3.
And we really shouldn't use any tables, GCC should figure it all out.
So, for double-word modulo by constant that would be expanded using a libcall,
go for x from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97589
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig ---
Simplified test case:
program main
type foo
real, allocatable, dimension(:) :: a[:]
end type foo
type (foo) :: x
sync all
allocate (x%a(10)[*])
end program main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97755
Bug ID: 97755
Summary: Explicit default constructor is called during
copy-list-initialization with a warning only
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51242
Barry Revzin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97755
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> I plan to work on this early in stage3.
> And we really shouldn't use any tables, GCC should figure it all out.
> So, for double-word modulo by constant that wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97459
--- Comment #17 from Thomas Koenig ---
To be compilable, my previous code lacks
typedef __uint128_t mytype;
> #define ONE ((__uint128_t) 1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97756
Bug ID: 97756
Summary: Inefficient handling of 128-bit arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97757
Bug ID: 97757
Summary: [11 Regression] fortran save_6.f90 fails with a segv
for -flto -O >= 2
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97757
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97758
Bug ID: 97758
Summary: bits/std_function.h: error: unknown type name
'type_info' when using -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
Bug ID: 97759
Summary: Could std::has_single_bit implementation be faster?
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97760
Bug ID: 97760
Summary: GCC outputs wrong values when compiling the testcase
with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97760
--- Comment #1 from yangyang ---
Created attachment 49521
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49521&action=edit
testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ce4ae1f4893e322495c5d24b2f0e807a7f7cf92f
commit r11-4827-gce4ae1f4893e322495c5d24b2f0e807a7f7cf92f
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Sun Nov 8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97705
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97756
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Actually, it was on a Ryzen 1700 (for the -march=native).
I'm at odds with architecture names...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93008
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
I just noticed this PR and wonder if there is anything to do on inliner side.
It uses DECL_DECLARED_INLINE that was invented to distinguish between implicit
inlines and explicit ones. So even if it would be bi
eration(vec_info*, _stmt_vec_info*,
gimple_stmt_iterator*, _slp_tree*, _slp_instance*, int, bool,
vec*)
/var/tmp/portage/cross-powerpc-e300c3-linux-gnu/gcc-11.0.0_alpha20201108/work/gcc-11-20201108/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c:8689
0x10b8087 can_vectorize_live_stmts
/var/tmp/portage/cross-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80379
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
The problem here is that the hint is output at decl merging and
-fno-strict-aliasing is a function local flag. At that time we do not even know
what functions will be since units are not streamed in yet. This
25 matches
Mail list logo
