https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The difference is
PatternDriver::TemplateEnum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The difference is
> PatternDriver::TemplateEnum vs
> PatternDriver::TemplateEnum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The difference is
> PatternDriver::TemplateEnum vs
> PatternDriver::TemplateEnum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100614
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100628
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100566
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ddc622a15d05510e7ab17ca1584d7fdb828d64e
commit r10-9828-g9ddc622a15d05510e7ab17ca1584d7fdb828d64e
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100600
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100593
--- Comment #4 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #3)
> I understand what you're saying, but it seems we're talking past each other.
>
> I agree that if a library is linked with any -Bsymbolic* flag, the main
> ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100605
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100619
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100623
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-17
Summary|[10/11/12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82967
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100626
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-17
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97865
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93745
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83838
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82005
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84508
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96425
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82407
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80759
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84472
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79224
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83206
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83052
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92902
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79166
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100633
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100634
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100566
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c8938332efa5ca5926b6f349e13b251e52bc2383
commit r9-9535-gc8938332efa5ca5926b6f349e13b251e52bc2383
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100566
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.3.0, 9.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100622
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100632
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100626
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Miles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89057
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89967
Bug 89967 depends on bug 89057, which changed state.
Bug 89057 Summary: [9 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89057
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95958
Bug 95958 depends on bug 89057, which changed state.
Bug 89057 Summary: [9 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89057
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100619
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Version|tree-ssa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100634
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100635
Bug ID: 100635
Summary: error: cannot bind non-const lvalue reference of type
'const volatile int&' to ...
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100622
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100630
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-17
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100601
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> Please avoid creating trivial duplicates.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 100453 ***
Okay Eric; I had overlooked this one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88797
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.3.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100515
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b050cf6a4d9c305daff4a96e5a2489ece69dc287
commit r12-823-gb050cf6a4d9c305daff4a96e5a2489ece69dc287
Author: Christophe Lyon
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100635
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-17
Ever confirmed|0
-languages=c,c++
--disable-werror --enable-multilib --with-system-zlib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210517 (experimental) [master revision
e49ff61d419:73ee0e029f5:1dfb5d8ab52c3c76c877077d8d6dc4eaae3c6153] (GCC)
[548] %
[548] % gcctk -O1 -c small.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90078
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.1.0, 9.3.1
Known to work|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Are you sure there is no define for _GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI used somewhere?
Both symbols are using std::__cxx11::basic_string so that means both files are
usin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100629
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I suspect that one file only sees a forward declaration of complement_names
(without the abi_tag) and the other file sees the definition (with the
abi_tag). The question is why the tag is on that type at a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577
John Buddery changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvb at cyberscience dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100593
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Monakov ---
Hm, I still don't think I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. I'm familiar
with the ELF standard (and FWIW I have read your blog posts on related
matters). I am responding to this sentiment from the o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100631
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100621
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100621
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
We need at least additionally check that the underlying random access range has
a sized sentinel before eliding the cache.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90078
--- Comment #19 from bin cheng ---
I will check if the latter fix can be easily backported to GCC-9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100635
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100633
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:582776eb1b62c32f5234566a01ea92247b7d6bcc
commit r12-827-g582776eb1b62c32f5234566a01ea92247b7d6bcc
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100626
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
*di3_doubleword calls split_double_mode with:
op0: (subreg:DI (reg/v:SI 89 [ li_18 ]) 0)
op1: (reg:DI 90 [ uc_4 ])
op2: (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 19 frame)
(const_int -4 [0xfffc]))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100574
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100576
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100580
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> First of all we fail to if-convert because we think
>
> iftmp.0_9 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(a)[i_15];
> tree could trap...
>
> which is because we're concerned about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100549
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:45063c0506a00f2673049d46f12a6061dca4692f
commit r12-833-g45063c0506a00f2673049d46f12a6061dca4692f
Author: liuhongt
Date: Thu May 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 17 May 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
>
> --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100590
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54202
Giuseppe D'Angelo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dangelog at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100595
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
--- Comment #2 from Ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100598
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100600
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Version|tree-ssa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100637
Bug ID: 100637
Summary: [i386] Vectorize 4-byte vectors
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100637
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100604
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to dragan.mladjenovic from comment #2)
> It seems so. Something like this helps in this case:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/emit-rtl.c b/gcc/emit-rtl.c
> index 07e908624a0..a102a9288c5 100644
> --- a/gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100608
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100613
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100631
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100619
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100498
--- Comment #2 from Wolfgang Roehrl ---
@Jonathan Wakely:
Thank you very much for the detailled answer. Using this info
it was possible for us to patch our 7.5 compiler version. At the moment we are
constrained to use a 7.x compiler because we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100620
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100622
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
why is masking not needed? it looks like it is present in both cases, once
before the return and once after the add (that could be sunk).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100623
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100625
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100626
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100632
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100634
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100636
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100512
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100612
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. in C++20 you can call your member function using a lambda:
std::jthread t1{[&obj] (std::stop_token st) {
obj.withStopToken(std::move(st)); }
};
Or generically, with perfect forwarding:
std::jth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100631
--- Comment #5 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to TC from comment #4)
> This one is a problem with the WP.
Thanks, Tim, does it have an LWG number?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100622
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Yes, the masking should be only performed at the end.
However, the inner loop could be further simplified to
label:
lwzu r8,4(r10)
add r3,r8,r3
bdnz label
without the need to do anything with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100582
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e0a5daf81f2c79a0275eccd7c1a25349990a7a4d
commit r12-837-ge0a5daf81f2c79a0275eccd7c1a25349990a7a4d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo