https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113187
Bug ID: 113187
Summary: `(X & C1) | C2` Simplifies to `A & (C1 | C2)` iff `(A
& C2) == C2`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113188
Bug ID: 113188
Summary: graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c: ‘isl_val_free’ was not
declared in this scope
Product: gcc
Version: 6.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113188
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113189
Bug ID: 113189
Summary: `(-X * Y) * -X` can be optimized to `(X * Y) * X`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization, TREE
Severity: en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113189
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Other examples where the negative can be removed:
```
int foo(int a) {
return -a * (-a * a);
}
int bar(int a) {
return (-a * -a) * a;
}
int foo1(int a, int b, int c) {
return -a * (-b * c);
}
``
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glaubitz at physik dot
fu-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
See my previous comment?
You can either write better code, or use -mcmodel=large or similar, accepting
the not-so-stellar generated code you get then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #5 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> See my previous comment?
>
> You can either write better code, or use -mcmodel=large or similar, accepting
> the not-so-stellar generated code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #5)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #4)
> > See my previous comment?
> >
> > You can either write better code, or use -mcmodel=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90693
Piotr Siupa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||piotrsiupa at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113189
--- Comment #2 from Joseph S. Myers ---
If Y is INT_MIN and X is -1, removing the negations introduces undefined
behavior in the first example (-(-1) * INT_MIN * -(-1) is valid, -1 * INT_MIN *
-1 has undefined behavior).
For floating types, rem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
This PR is for the sysv ABI, while most discussion was about the "ELFv1" ABI.
Only the 64-bit ABIs have the code model ABI, for the powerpc*-*-*
configurations.
Some other architectures have it for mor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> This PR is for the sysv ABI, while most discussion was about the "ELFv1" ABI.
Doesn't the subject clearly mention "powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu"?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108208
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #8)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #7)
> > This PR is for the sysv ABI, while most discussion was about the "ELFv1"
> > ABI.
>
> Doe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113190
Bug ID: 113190
Summary: Alert not to report bugs against EOL releases
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113190
Eyal Rozenberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eyalroz1 at gmx dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80786
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113191
Bug ID: 113191
Summary: [10.1/11/12/13/14 Regression] Incorrect overload
resolution when base class function introduced with a
using declaration is more constrained than a function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109133
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109133
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113192
Bug ID: 113192
Summary: [14 Regression] ERROR: couldn't execute
"../../../gcc/libgomp/testsuite/flock": no such file
or directory
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88345
--- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 56970
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56970&action=edit
Patch I am testing
Hi,
this adds -falign-all-functions parameter. It still look like more reasonable
(and backw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #5 from John David Anglin ---
The problem is TREE_SYMBOL_REFERENCED is not set for libfuncs. This fixes
problem on hppa64-hpux:
bash-5.1$ git diff gcc/varasm.cc
diff --git a/gcc/varasm.cc b/gcc/varasm.cc
index 69f8f8ee018..0a1cc022
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113112
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Pan Li :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a29b00365a07745c4ba2ed2af374e7c732aaeb3
commit r14-6877-g9a29b00365a07745c4ba2ed2af374e7c732aaeb3
Author: Juzhe-Zhong
Date: Fri Dec 29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113193
Bug ID: 113193
Summary: [SH] ICE in gen_reg_rtx, at emit-rtl.cc:1177 with
-mfcsa -funsafe-math-operations
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
Bug ID: 113194
Summary: Hangup build ExtractAPIConsumer.cpp at -Og
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113195
Bug ID: 113195
Summary: gnat bug box when comparing access to subtype with
access inside record
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
--- Comment #1 from Paul Hua ---
Created attachment 56972
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56972&action=edit
preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me with r14-6875-g3a7dd24eadeb91 on x86_64:
./cc1plus tmp/ExtractAPIConsumer.cpp.ii -quiet -Og -fPIC
-fno-semantic-interposition -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -fno-lifetime-dse
-ffunction-sections -f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113194
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
There seems to be some high memory usage in the front-end though:
template instantiation : 12.13 ( 29%) 4.33 ( 35%) 16.72 ( 31%)
759M ( 44%)
But other than that it works for me on x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113133
--- Comment #11 from Haochen Jiang ---
I just checked the code and pattern. I suppose the simple remove is reasonable
here. We should only allow x/ymm16+ for scalar instructions, but not this
pattern.
32 matches
Mail list logo
