https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> One possible way is sink maxInt = src[i] out of loop, when there's
> synchronised index search in the loop, just like below.
>
For scalar part, it's 1 conditional m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103219
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104580
Bug ID: 104580
Summary: [nvptx] Use prevent_branch_around_nothing only when
necessary
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104580
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 52457
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52457&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100784
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2b1b5b16f3b45647b1be87cbbe7fe8b4b854b7c3
commit r11-9581-g2b1b5b16f3b45647b1be87cbbe7fe8b4b854b7c3
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100786
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6525b9fb23ec442f32b1809a2b44c415c0910387
commit r11-9582-g6525b9fb23ec442f32b1809a2b44c415c0910387
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103361
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d2f4753d4ff0edf944281cc2e4d5b5b91a9f14c9
commit r11-9583-gd2f4753d4ff0edf944281cc2e4d5b5b91a9f14c9
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104532
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f99ad11af953568e1a01e4f4fe31cba0f11879a5
commit r12-7274-gf99ad11af953568e1a01e4f4fe31cba0f11879a5
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104532
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104570
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103544
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d1dc0f6222ecb6eda674e708235c7bc0d90fa987
commit r11-9584-gd1dc0f6222ecb6eda674e708235c7bc0d90fa987
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103544
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c08d4266e48d52b7f8d16c79d3471be40ff56acc
commit r11-9585-gc08d4266e48d52b7f8d16c79d3471be40ff56acc
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103864
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c08d4266e48d52b7f8d16c79d3471be40ff56acc
commit r11-9585-gc08d4266e48d52b7f8d16c79d3471be40ff56acc
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103544
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.2.1
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103864
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104557
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c2b44b52364cb5661095b346de794bc7ff02866
commit r12-7275-g1c2b44b52364cb5661095b346de794bc7ff02866
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||45178
--- Comment #5 from Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104557
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100537
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Ian, the PR100464 fix depends on this but when trying to cherry-pick the Go fix
to the gcc-11 branch I get a conflict in gcc/go/gofrontend/MERGE:
<<< HEAD
9782e85bef1c16c72a4980856d921cea104b129c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Artur Bać from comment #2)
> "* include/bits/stl_iterator.h (__niter_base): Make constexpr for C++20."
>
> c++20 ?
> according to cppreference make_move_iterator is constexpr since c++17
> ht
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98465
--- Comment #43 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And updating vstring is exactly what I'd like to avoid. It's pretty much on
life support as far as I'm concerned.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104567
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51336
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The name temploid got replaced by "templated entity", see [temp.pre].
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101158
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:578bc9d1cdd91694e4da393d32f0fddd213a6042
commit r10-10460-g578bc9d1cdd91694e4da393d32f0fddd213a6042
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100923
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a650dc2deb2b6906334c6b06991255f46df93c16
commit r10-10461-ga650dc2deb2b6906334c6b06991255f46df93c16
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102762
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:724177df8e159dc3f70cd0e13a598e10dd321f37
commit r10-10462-g724177df8e159dc3f70cd0e13a598e10dd321f37
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a6ed1bd9d0b20d0ec0ca6d7ab1e0cefe57db687
commit r10-10463-g6a6ed1bd9d0b20d0ec0ca6d7ab1e0cefe57db687
Author: Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103181
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f5c26a2f02572996efd2b2de0dd5600ad7e91e7
commit r10-10464-g5f5c26a2f02572996efd2b2de0dd5600ad7e91e7
Author: Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f5c26a2f02572996efd2b2de0dd5600ad7e91e7
commit r10-10464-g5f5c26a2f02572996efd2b2de0dd5600ad7e91e7
Author: Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103237
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4015dab1a4697177f5801c8149f7ce15eeeb9e1
commit r10-10465-gc4015dab1a4697177f5801c8149f7ce15eeeb9e1
Author: Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104559
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yep, that's why we have it, thanks. But it should have been excised years ago.
I'll deprecate it, and kill it some time after GCC 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102762
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101158
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #4 from Artur Bać ---
In 12 ?
In 11.2.1/include/g++-v11/bits/cpp_type_traits.h
template
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
inline _Iterator
__miter_base(_Iterator __it)
and as it was mentioned overload in stl_iterator.h has missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104551
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:754dce903ca28c4c2f2bc8614a8de5e631655f2e
commit r12-7276-g754dce903ca28c4c2f2bc8614a8de5e631655f2e
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103771
--- Comment #40 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:754dce903ca28c4c2f2bc8614a8de5e631655f2e
commit r12-7276-g754dce903ca28c4c2f2bc8614a8de5e631655f2e
Author: liuhongt
Date: Wed Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104551
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao.liu ---
Fixed in GCC12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
PR50374?
It's from Fotran minloc/maxloc intrinsics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45178
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:634c2bc38ff66f13164967a8e3b965e8255dd4d9
commit r11-9586-g634c2bc38ff66f13164967a8e3b965e8255dd4d9
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102893
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d9c2ed02128ddf327465333f5563500b6cf8886
commit r11-9587-g6d9c2ed02128ddf327465333f5563500b6cf8886
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Bug ID: 104581
Summary: Huge compile-time regression building SPEC 2017
538.imagick_r with PGO
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-* i?86-*-*
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't understand what you're saying. __miter_base is not make_move_iterator,
so what do you mean?
std::make_move_iterator is constexpr for C++17 and up. That's true in GCC 12
and in every release since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85487
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #6 from Artur Bać ---
My bad. copy itself is constexpr since c++20, I was misleaded by overload used
for move_iterator with copy that has missing constexpr
template
auto __miter_base(move_iterator<_Iterator> __it)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I suspect that
FOR_EACH_SUBRTX (iter, array, src, NONCONST)
if (ix86_check_avx_upper_register (*iter))
{
int status = ix86_avx_u128_mode_source (insn, *i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103237
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:68c80396906ab10051a69a2181e114c61dd4ee8a
commit r9-9954-g68c80396906ab10051a69a2181e114c61dd4ee8a
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103181
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ac5fbea476e4ebd6a0086ccfbf92e648768be7b
commit r9-9955-g1ac5fbea476e4ebd6a0086ccfbf92e648768be7b
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103248
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ac5fbea476e4ebd6a0086ccfbf92e648768be7b
commit r9-9955-g1ac5fbea476e4ebd6a0086ccfbf92e648768be7b
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:523f5950c70d65714bedf9d5fe164d9e6d69dd87
commit r9-9956-g523f5950c70d65714bedf9d5fe164d9e6d69dd87
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103237
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103181
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|10.3.1 |10.3.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102798
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
Bug ID: 104582
Summary: Unoptimal code for __negdi2 (and others) from libgcc2
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Since targetm.mode_switching.needed is called as part of the mode-switching
dataflow problem I don't see how looking at reg refs should be needed at all.
What might be needed and what I'm not sure is availa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
--- Comment #1 from Uro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104549
--- Comment #3 from Cristian Assaiante ---
I have tested multiple older gcc versions (4.3, 7.5, 9.4, 11.2) and apparently
the variable is visible in 4.3 and 7.5.
The asm for the main function of the binary from gcc7.5:
main:
.LFB1:
# a.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103856
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aoliva at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103856
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 52458
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52458&action=edit
candidate patch under test
Here's a proposed fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Please note that gcc-10 does not vectorize the testcase even with -O3
-ftree-vectorize.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Therefore regressed with r12-7125-g5390a2f191682dae3c6d1e1deac20e05be413514
The insn walk was there before btw (the first jump in the LNT graph). This
just ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104540
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-17
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:973e0bc1542dd5efc501fef8653d47c9b00adf97
commit r11-9588-g973e0bc1542dd5efc501fef8653d47c9b00adf97
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ah, you're right.
So, can't it instead of the quadratic walk just compare DF_INSN_LUID?
If it isn't right after df_analyze and some insns could have been added in
between, it would need to maintain the luids
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Or if we have in df some way how to determine which insns have been added, just
ignore those and look for their last predecessor or first successor that isn't
dirty/without df computed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9982b5a81a151663c76ba0a3fb6df674f29ba4b
commit r10-10466-gf9982b5a81a151663c76ba0a3fb6df674f29ba4b
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102358
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it w/ the latest weekly snapshot as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104566
--- Comment #2 from Xander L ---
Hey,
After trying the same thing on a different workstation it did work. I'm not
sure if it was just that workstation or some temporary error. Should I close
this as 'fixed' or 'worksforme' or leave this open? I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104581
>
> --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Ah, you're right.
> So, can't it instead o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104576
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6bbd8afee0036c274f5ebb5b48d6fdc2091bd046
commit r12-7277-g6bbd8afee0036c274f5ebb5b48d6fdc2091bd046
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104565
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11/12 Regression] |[10/11 Regression]
|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104540
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 52459
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52459&action=edit
candidate patch under test
Here's a candidate fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103628
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There isn't a check_mod.f90 but there is a check_mod.F90 (Linux is case
sensitive) and using that I was able to reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104549
--- Comment #4 from Cristian Assaiante ---
We have tested also multiple versions of gdb.
With versions 9.2 and 11.2 we have the same behavior: variable i is visible for
gcc4 and gcc7 and not visible for more recent gcc versions.
With version 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84201
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
One option is to introduce a less invasive optimization option to avoid the
undesirable vectorization. For example -fno-vectorize-fp-inductions noting
this particular loop is a floating-point induction. U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94944
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99936, which changed state.
Bug 99936 Summary: [modules] FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 99936, which changed state.
Bug 99936 Summary: [modules] FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header* on Darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99936
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104568
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
I am very well aware that my patch was just a mitigation, not
something that would avoid the problem under all circumstances. We
can attempt to look at array access indices during the summary
creation phas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||104263
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84201
--- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> One option is to introduce a less invasive optimization option[...]
I think that would be useful, yes. It could even be a param if we do not want
to commit t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102656
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100537
--- Comment #20 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
There's no perfect way to handle the MERGE file on the release branches. What
I usually do is to resolve the patch by replacing the existing revision number
with the new one. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
What slp does is just
- w.s.low = _1;
- w.s.high = _5;
+ _14 = {_1, _5};
+ MEM[(union *)&w] = _14;
I must say I don't really see that as a beneficial optimization, construction
of a vector from scalars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104582
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The costs look weird:
_1 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
_5 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
_1 1 times vector_store costs 12 in body
1 times vec_construct costs 8 in prologue
vec_construct is ce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103845
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Confirmed. The first patch there.
I will still prepare a patch with the testcase to avoid an independent
regression.
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
