On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 8:58 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have an LTO pass which stores information collected during "generate
> function summary" in a map which is symtab_node* -> data*. I know that
> the symtab_node*s are encoded by an lto encoder and can be decoded
> back during
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 7:54 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> My current understanding of LTO is that the callgraph is very dynamic
> (i.e., optimizations might add or remove cgraph_nodes). A while back I
> encountered an issue where I couldn't print the cgraph_node::name of a
> function
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:26 PM Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I was wondering why the vx_crtbegin.o file had a .init_array section and
> not a .init_array.00101, when the function is defined with
> __attribute__((constructor (101))) (see libgcc/config/vxcrtstuff.c).
>
> After a lot of diggin
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 2:42 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via
Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>
> Bump required DejaGnu version to 1.5.3 (or later).
> Ok for trunk?
OK.
Thanks,
Richard.
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * doc/install.texi: Bump required minimum DejaGnu version.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 11:13 AM Keith Packard via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This option (enabled by default) controls optimizations which convert
> a sequence of operations into an equivalent sequence that includes
> calls to builtin functions. Typical cases here are code which matches
> memcpy, cal
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 4:18 PM Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/31/2021 6:12 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > After Jeff's explanation of the symbiosis between jump threading and
> > the uninit pass, I'm beginning to see that (almost) every
> > Wuninitialized warning is cause for reflection. It
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 7:26 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
>
> The manual says that the first argument of a TARGET_MEM_REF
>
>"is @code{TMR_SYMBOL} and must be a @code{VAR_DECL} of an object
>with a fixed address."
>
> The TARGET_MEM_REF below has as its first argument an ADDR_EXPR
> and n
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 12:57 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 09:32:21AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 2:42 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via
> > Gcc-patches wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Ber
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 8:12 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 01:22:24PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> > On 11/4/21 12:55, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > >On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 09:32:21AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > >wrote:
>
Status
==
The GCC development branch now is open for general bugfixing (Stage 3).
Take the quality data below with a big grain of salt - most of the
new P3 classified bugs will become P1 or P2 (generally every
regression against GCC 11 is to be considered P1 if it concerns
primary or second
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:35 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> Our test group added "-fchecking" to a script and my optimization
> failed.
>
> I can't find any explanation of this type of bug. I grepped the code
> and flag_checking was all over the place so it's not like
> I can use gdb to pin it
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 10:40 PM Navid Rahimi via Gcc wrote:
>
> > (A << B) eq/ne 0
> Yes that is correct. But for detecting such pattern you You have to detect B
> and make sure B is boolean. GIMPLE transfers that Boolean to integer before
> shifting.
Note it's the C language specification th
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:46 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> What is happening should be trivial to determine but for some reason it's
> not. I'd normally bounce this off a coworker but given the pandemic
> and modern dispersed hiring practices it's not even remotely possible.
>
> I'm making this
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 9:56 PM Gary Oblock wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
> I rebuilt at "-O0" and that particular call now works but on a call to
> the same function with a different offset it fails. 😱
use a debugger to see why
> Thanks,
>
> Gary
>
>
> _
On December 16, 2021 7:33:37 AM GMT+01:00, Shubham Narlawar via Gcc
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>
>I have a PHI node that defines a variable that is used in 1 statement. I
>then delete the statement. I think I need to update the PHI node to no
>longer reference that variable. I looked through some code and
On December 16, 2021 9:43:56 PM GMT+01:00, Gaius Mulley
wrote:
>
>
>I've been testing the gm2 development branch (based on gcc-12)
>against lto and non lto builds.
>
> git clone git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git gcc-git
> cd gcc-git
> git checkout devel/modula-2
>
>I'm using the configure options:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 7:10 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> This is one of those things that has always puzzled
> me so I thought I break down and finally ask.
>
> There are two ways a memory reference (tree) prints:
>
> MEM[(struct arc_t *)_684].flow
>
> and
>
> _684->flow
>
> Poking under the
gnoring qualifiers. */
> && (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (node))
> == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT
> (TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (node, 1)
> && (!(flags & TDF_ALIAS)
> || MR_DEPENDENCE_CLIQUE (node) == 0))
>
>
urpose. It simply shows that GCC evolved over
its lifetime ;)
Richard.
> Thanks,
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 11:28 PM
> To: Gary Oblock
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Why do thes
On January 8, 2022 9:32:24 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Uecker
wrote:
>
>Hi Richard,
>
>I have a question regarding reodering of volatile
>accesses and trapping operations. My initial
>assumption (and hope) was that compilers take
>care to avoid creating traps that are incorrectly
>ordered relative to o
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:12 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> An optimization flag that I recently added is being
> set to zero in push_cfun (which after a couple of
> levels of calls cl_optimization_restore to this.)
>
> The flag defined like this:
>
> finterleaving-index-32-bits
> Common Var(fla
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 10:09 PM Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
>
> Am Samstag, den 08.01.2022, 10:35 -0800 schrieb Andrew Pinski:
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 12:33 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Richard,
> > >
> > > I have a question regarding reodering of volatile
> > > accesse
Status
==
The GCC development branch is open for general bugfixing (Stage 3)
and will transition to regression and documentation fixing only
(Stage 4) on the end of Jan 16th.
Take the quality data below with a big grain of salt - most of the
new P3 classified bugs will become P1 or P2 (genera
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 6:36 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Montag, den 10.01.2022, 10:04 +0100 schrieb Richard Biener:
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 10:09 PM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > > Am Samstag, den 08.01.2022, 10:35 -0800 schrieb Andrew Pinski:
> >
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 9:17 AM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2022, 08:11 +0100 schrieb Richard Biener:
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 6:36 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
> > > Am Montag, den 10.01.2022, 10:04 +0100 schrieb Richard Biener:
>
> Hi Richard,
&
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 1:52 PM Mikel Mendizabal via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Dear GCC developers,
>
> In the past year we started the offload of our software to GPUs. We decided
> to go with OpenACC. The program we are trying to offload is Millepede2 (MP2),
> a tracker alignment software used to align t
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:54 AM David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2022-01-16 at 18:52 +0530, Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> Hi; various notes inline below...
>
> >
> > My aim is to iterate over gimple call stmt parameters and check
> > whether it is constant or constant exp
Status
==
The GCC master branch is now in regression and documentation fixing
mode (Stage 4) in preparation for the release of GCC 13. Re-opening
of general development will happen once we reach zero P1 regressions
which is when we branch for the release. Time wise history projects
that to
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 3:11 PM Michael Matz via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022, Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> > > Because it interferes with existing optimisations. An explicit
> > > checkpoint has a clear meaning. Using every volatile access that way
> > > will hurt performance of code
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 8:19 PM Shubham Narlawar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 1:55 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:54 AM David Malcolm via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2022-01-16 at 18:52 +0530,
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 9:46 AM Eric Botcazou via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> > Release managers.
>
> They certainly have authority on the timing, but not on the contents.
Technically all release managers are also global reviewers, but I
agree the speciality
of the Ada setup (esp. the runtime being in
On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 8:42 PM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is it possible to generate a NOTE instruction at GIMPLE level?
>
> My use case scenario is as below -
> I want to create a note for __builtin_xyz(_x) such that there is a
> placeholder just before function call and in RT
On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 8:14 PM Mohamed Atef via Gcc wrote:
>
> After i built it
> I tried make - j 8 and it's recompiling now i thought i will have messege
> like
> Every thing is up to date or there are no change done
> But it actually started to compile again
If you modify parts of gcc/ only th
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:38 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 12:20 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 17:57 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2022-02-14 at 10:57 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > > [CCing Mark in the hopes of insight from the valgrind s
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 2:00 PM Julian Seward wrote:
>
> Sorry for the delayed response. I've been paging this all back in.
>
> I first saw this problem when memcheck-ing Firefox as compiled by Clang, some
> years back. Not long after GCC was also at it. The transformation in
> question is (at
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 3:25 PM Andras Tantos wrote:
>
> Hello all!
>
> I'm working on porting GCC to a new processor architecture. I think
> I've finally got to a fairly stable stage, so the next logical step
> would be to test and optimize. For that, I would need some benchmarks,
> and this is w
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 11:44 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:45 AM Shubham Narlawar
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 1:15 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:04 AM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
>
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 8:38 AM Shubham Narlawar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:02 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 11:44 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:45 AM Shubham Narlaw
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 2:10 PM Shubham Narlawar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 3:55 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 8:38 AM Shubham Narlawar
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:02 PM Richard Biener
>
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 3:37 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am working on an analysis that is able to determine some static
> information about a specific variable. At the moment, I would like to avoid
> much of the transformation by taking advantage of other GCC's passes. So, I
> can
On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 4:31 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Martin!
>
> Thanks for replying, turns out that while I was trying to reply to you I
> was able to get the answer. Turns out there is indeed one tree node which
> is shared across the two functions. And that is
>
> TREE_OPERAND (MEM_
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:56 AM Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in annotating INTEGER_CSTs. I have added a field to
> typed_trees and set the value in some cases. However, INTEGER_CSTs can be
> shared and copied across the function and even copied to other functions. I
> don't w
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:55 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to understand what path is executed in GCC from parsing a C
> expression (in a global variable declaration) to the value in DECL_INITIAL.
> At the moment, I have annotated a tree during parsing. I have another
> de
On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 7:44 PM Shubham Narlawar wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 12:52 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 2:10 PM Shubham Narlawar
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 3:55 PM Richard Biener
>
Status
==
The GCC development branch is in regression and documentation fixing
mode (Stage 4) in preparation for the release of GCC 13. Re-opening
of general development will happen once we reach zero P1 regressions
which is when we branch for the release. Time wise history projects
that t
Status
==
The gcc-11 branch is in regression and documentation fixing mode.
It's time to prepare for the release of GCC 11.3 as we have accumulated
quite a number of fixes since GCC 11.2 was released. The plan is
to create a release candidate on Wednesday, April 13th, which is
in about one
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 1:26 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been looking at implementing the complex multiply patterns for the
> amdgcn port, but I'm not getting the code I was hoping for. When I try
> to use the patterns on x86_64 or AArch64 they don't seem to work there
> either, s
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:53 AM Steve Kargl via Gcc wrote:
>
> If I configure gcc with the following
>
> ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \
> --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking --disable-multilib \
> --disable-libsanitizer --disable-lto.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 9:07 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:53 AM Steve Kargl via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > If I configure gcc with the following
> >
> > ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \
> > --ena
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:20 AM Jan Hubicka via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
> >
> >
> > > On 08-Apr-2022, at 6:32 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > >
> > > Ankur,
> > >> I was browsing the list of submitted GSoC projects this year and the
> > >> project regarding bypassing assembler when generating LTO object f
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 2:53 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 12 Apr 2022, at 13:31, Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > On 4/12/22 11:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:20 AM Jan Hubicka via Gcc
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> &
Status
==
The gcc-11 branch is now frozen in preparation for a GCC 11.3 release
candidate and the GCC 11.3 release next week. All changes now require
release manager approval.
The remaining P1 bugs have been resolved or pushed back to GCC 11.4.
Quality Data
Priority
The first release candidate for GCC 11.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.3.0-RC-20220414/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.3.0-RC-20220414/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r11-9879-g53254184bda630.
I have so far bootstrapped an
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> On 4/13/22 09:30, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Status
> > ==
> >
> > The gcc-11 branch is now frozen in preparation for a GCC 11.3 release
> > candidate and the GCC 11.3 release next week. All
Status
==
The gcc-11 branch is again open for regression and documentation fixes.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1 0
P2 428 + 6
P3 55
P4
The GNU Compiler Collection version 11.3 has been released.
GCC 11.3 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 11 branch containing important
fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 11.2 with more than 189 bugs
fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the WWW and FTP serve
> Am 01.05.2022 um 13:42 schrieb Jakub Jelinek via Gcc :
>
> On Sun, May 01, 2022 at 11:02:29AM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> All of these show new fails (presumably because checking is off):
>>
>> XPASS: c-c++-common/goacc/kernels-decompose-pr100400-1-2.c -std=c++98
>> (internal compiler er
The GCC developers are proud to announce another major GCC release, 12.1.
This year we celebrated the 35th anniversary of the first GCC beta release
and this month we will celebrate 35 years since the GCC 1.0 release!
This release deprecates support for the STABS debugging format and
introduces
Status
==
The GCC 9 branch is in regression and documentation fixing mode.
After the release of GCC 12.1 it's time to retire this branch and do
a last release from it - GCC 9.5. I will do a GCC 9.5 release
candidate in two weeks from now, May 20th, following by the release
a week after tha
> Am 14.05.2022 um 00:57 schrieb Gaius Mulley via Gcc :
>
>
> Hi David,
>
> David Edelsohn writes:
>
>> I hope that you and the GNU Modula-2 team can propose the merge of the
>> Modula-2 front-end and library soon.
>
> [reposting with a new title for mailing list clarity]
>
> Yes I was a
Status
==
The GCC 9 branch is now frozen for its final release, GCC 9.5.
The branch will be closed after that.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1
P2 369 - 58
P3
The first release candidate for GCC 9.5 is available from
https://sourceware.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9.5.0-RC-20220520/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
1bc79c506205b6a5db82897340bdebaaf7ada934.
I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate
on x86_64-
On Sun, 22 May 2022, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi
>
> > On 20 May 2022, at 09:02, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> > The first release candidate for GCC 9.5 is available from
> >
> > https://sourceware.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9.5.0-RC-20220520/
> >
&g
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 10:36 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc wrote:
>
> I am going to get to some documentation for ranger and its components
> later this cycle.
>
> I use to stick these sorts things on the wiki page, but i find that gets
> out of date really quickly. I could add more comments to the
After the GCC 9.5 release the GCC 9 branch is now closed and the
hooks should reject any further pushes to it.
Thanks,
Richard.
The GNU Compiler Collection version 9.5 has been released.
GCC 9.5 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 9 branch
containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in
GCC 9.4 with more than 171 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This is also the last release from the GCC 9 branch, GCC c
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:13 PM Laleh Beni via Gcc wrote:
>
> GCC compiler is able to understand if the prefix of an array holds
> constant/static data and apply compiler optimizations on that partial
> constant part of the array, however, it seems that it is not leveraging
> this information in
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 3:59 PM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> [1] I want to achieve hosting of a custom built-in call out of loop that
> loads an immediate value.
>
> for (int i = 0; i < 4000; i++) {
>_9 = (unsigned int) _1;
>slli_6 = _9 << 8;
>srli_36 =
96, cqe_size)) ? -14 : 0;
>
> with
>
> err = copy_to_user2((void *)buf, init_ents,
> 4096 * cqe_size) ? -14 : 0;
>
> makes the code compile successfully.
>
> I have bisected GCC to find which commit in GCC fixes this problem and
&g
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 12:27 PM Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote:
>
> Before becoming a "C" programmer, I spent few years building simulations in
> Pascal. I still remember (and long for) the ability to define integer with
> range constraints:
>
> var foobar: 10..50 ; // Accept 10, 11, 12, ..., 49
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:27 AM Chris Johns wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build a cross-compiler on FreeBSD with --enable-lto because a
> chip vendor is using it when building controller software that is part of a
> system.
>
> The build I am using symlinks gmp, mpfr etc as source so they ar
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 2:34 AM Dave Blanchard wrote:
>
> At some point between GCC 9 and GCC 12, the preprocessor started behaving
> differently. Before if GCC were launched as /lib/cpp or /usr/bin/cpp (I
> think) it would assume the user wanted to preprocess something and
> automatically laun
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 4:52 PM Philip Herron
wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Since November 2020, I've worked full-time on the Rust front-end for
> GCC, thanks to Open Source Security, Inc and Embecosm. As a result, I
> am writing to this mailing list to seek feedback from the collective
> experience
tches?
Yes, that's the prefered way. Having an integration branch ready for
people to play with is also useful - if you are ready you might want to
push something like that to the gcc.gnu.org repository under the devel/
namespace.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Again thanks to everyone for helpi
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 2:35 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for some help in how to create a new function at compile time /
> link time. The idea is an alternative form of constant propagation.
>
> The current implementation of ipa-cp, may specialize functions for which
>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 3:27 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 2:35 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm looking for some help in how to create a new function at compile time /
> > link time. The idea is an
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 3:42 PM Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> Hi Richard,
>
>
>> >
>> > So instead of wrapping the function why not transform the original function
>> > to have a prologue doing a runtime check for the compile-time specialized
>> > versions and perform tail-calls to them?
>> >
>> > What I
> Am 17.07.2022 um 17:29 schrieb lkcl via Gcc :
>
> with the recent announcement that rust is supported by gcc
> has it been taken into consideration that the draconian (non-free-compatible)
> requirements of the rust Trademark make the distribution of the gcc
> compiler Unlawful?
>
>http
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 8:55 PM Surya Kumari Jangala via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am working on PR105586. This is a -fcompare-debug failure, with the
> differences starting during sched1 pass. The sequence of two instructions in
> a basic block (block 4) is flipped with -g.
> In addition to this,
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch is open for regression and documentation fixes.
It is time for a GCC 12.2 release, we are comparatively late with it
already. The plan is to create a GCC 12.2 release candidate on
August 12th which should give plenty of time to backport or implement
important re
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch is now frozen in preparation for a GCC 12.2 release
candidate and the GCC 12.2 release next week. All changes now require
release manager approval.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- --
The first release candidate for GCC 12.2 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12.2.0-RC-20220812/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r12-8684-g6b7d570a5001bb.
I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
x86_64-linux-gnu. Please
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 8:35 AM Michael Clark via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> This is an edited version of a message posted on the LLVM Discourse.
>
> I want to share what I have been working on as I feel it may be of
> interest to the GCC compiler developers, specifically concerning alias
> anal
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch is again open for regression and documentation fixes.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1 0
P2 434 + 2
P3 64+ 2
P4
The GNU Compiler Collection version 12.2 has been released.
GCC 12.2 is the first bug-fix release from the GCC 12 branch containing
important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 12.1 with more
than 71 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the WWW server
On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 1:57 AM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I'm implementing a tool for translation validation (similar to Alive2 for
> LLVM). The tool uses an SMT solver to verify for each GIMPLE pass that the
> output IR is a refinement of the input IR:
> * That each compiled functio
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 2:03 AM Krister Walfridsson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > It's generally poorly documented what is considered 'undefined behavior'.
> > We desparately need a section in the internals manual for this.
> &
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 11:50 AM Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I played some more with odd programs and the effect on control flow
> graph construction (as a part of condition coverage support [1]) and
> came across this:
>
> int fn (int a, int b, int c) {
> int x = 0;
> if (a &
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 3:33 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am clearly missing something here … can someone point out where it is?
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/Variable-Attributes.html#Variable%20Attributes
> in the discussion of applying this to structure fields:
>
> "The al
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 8:57 PM Koning, Paul via Gcc wrote:
>
> Given that pdp11 no longer supports debug output, I get a lot more test
> failures, like this:
>
> spawn -ignore SIGHUP /Users/pkoning/Documents/svn/build/pdp/gcc/xgcc
> -B/Users/pkoning/Documents/svn/build/pdp/gcc/ -mlra
> -fdiagno
On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 2:23 PM Koning, Paul wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 5, 2022, at 5:29 AM, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 8:57 PM Koning, Paul via Gcc wrote:
> >>
> >> Gi
> Am 06.09.2022 um 16:23 schrieb Henrik Holst :
>
> Hi all,
>
> is there any reason why the access attribute is not used as hints to the
> optimizer?
>
> If we take this ancient example:
>
> void foo(const int *);
>
> int bar(void)
> {
>int x = 0;
>int y = 0;
>
>for (int i =
On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 5:19 PM Henrik Holst
wrote:
>
>
>
> Den tis 6 sep. 2022 kl 16:47 skrev Richard Biener
> :
>>
>>
>>
>> > Am 06.09.2022 um 16:23 schrieb Henrik Holst :
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > is there
On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 1:37 PM Henrik Holst
wrote:
>
>
>
> Den ons 7 sep. 2022 kl 09:48 skrev Richard Biener
> :
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 5:19 PM Henrik Holst
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Den tis 6 sep. 2022 kl 16:47 sk
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 1:23 PM Fredrik Hederstierna via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We have a function that does not used an in-parameter, simplified example:
>
> void test_unused_string_param_gc(const char* unused)
> {
>// empty
> }
>
> Though when we have calls to this function, the arguments ar
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:33 PM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I have implemented a tool for translation validation (similar to Alive2
> for LLVM). The tool takes GIMPLE IR for two functions and checks that the
> second is a refinement of the first. That is,
> * The returned value is th
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 11:12 AM Ulrich Drepper via Gcc wrote:
>
> For my own projects I started /automatically/ signing all the git commits.
> This is so far not that important for my private projects but it is
> actually important for projects like gcc. It adds another layer of
> security to th
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 10:17 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
>
> As part of implementing a C++23 proposal [1] to massively increase the
> scope of the freestanding C++ standard library some questions came up
> about the special handling of main() that happens for hosted
> environments.
>
> As r
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 2:22 PM Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>
>
> On 9/8/22 12:30, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
> > On 02/09/2022 14:22, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 11:50 AM Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
>
On Sat, Oct 8, 2022 at 12:54 AM James K. Lowden
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 12:03:12 -0700
> Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
>
> > > Building a full distribution of this tree isn't done
> > > via 'make dist'. Check out the etc/ subdirectory
> ...
> > You just tar up the source.
> > Yo
2201 - 2300 of 2622 matches
Mail list logo
