On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 7:19 PM Pali Rohár via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> During development and debugging of U-Boot bootloader I got strange
> error from ARM GNU assembler, which looks like a bug in binutils or gcc.
>
> Below is simplified code which can trigger it:
>
> $ cat test.S
> kernoffs
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 12:37 PM Nick Clifton wrote:
>
> Hi Pali, Hi Richard,
>
> > Interesting... Another test case which is working fine:
> >
> >kernoffs:
> >.word 0x4 - (. - 0x0)
>
> This works because this expression can be converted into an instruction
> and a relocation in the ob
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 5:44 AM Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> On 10/18/22 20:09, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> >
> > On 10/18/22 16:36, Jeff Law wrote:
> There isn't a great place in GCC to handle this right now. If the
> constraints were relaxed in PRE, then we'd have a chance, but
> gett
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 1:54 AM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> C2x allows variable-argument functions declared with (...) as parameters -
> no named arguments - as in C++. It *also* allows such functions to access
> their parameters, unlike C++, by relaxing the requirements on va_start so
> it no longer
Status
==
The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is open for
general development (Stage 1). Stage 1 will end at the end of
November 13th after which we will accept no new features that
have not yet been submitted. Starting with Novemer 14th we
are in a two month general bugfixin
On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 9:28 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> even recent 32-bit architectures such as RISC-V do not support 64-bit
> atomic operations. Using -fprofile-update=atomic for the 32-bit RISC-V
> RV32GC ISA yields:
>
> warning: target does not support atomic profile update, sing
On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 7:22 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> On 05.11.22 12:18, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 9:28 AM Sebastian Huber
> > wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> even recent 32-bit architectures such as RISC-V do not support 64
On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 1:00 PM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> On 08.11.22 11:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> How do I get ((unsigned int *) &val) + 1 from tree addr?
> >>
> >> It would be great to have a code example for the construction of the "if
> >&
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 1:09 AM Sam James via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 9 Nov 2022, at 00:00, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Nov 2022, Sam James via Gcc wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, please (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106899)
> >> even for snapshots? Pretty please? :)
> >
> >
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 6:11 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> > I'd say that doing a trunk snapshot build every day as CI would be nice, we
> > can then publish one once a week, skipping days where the build failed.
>
>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 2:05 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 11/9/22 18:14, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Nov 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> >> 1) not synchronized content among lib*/Makefile.in and lib*/Makefile.am.
> >> Apparently, I modified the generated Makefile.in file with the rules like
> Am 10.11.2022 um 17:45 schrieb Georg-Johann Lay :
>
>
>
>> Am 10.11.22 um 16:25 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
>>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 15:23, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 15:17, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Am 10.11.22 um 16:05 schrieb Martin Lišk
On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 3:13 PM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> For example, for Fortran code like:
>
> write (*,*) "Hello world"
>
> ..., 'gfortran' creates:
>
> struct __st_parameter_dt dt_parm.0;
>
> try
> {
> dt_parm.0.common.filename =
> &"source-gcc/libgomp/test
Status
==
The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is now in
bugfixing mode (Stage 3) until the end of Jan 15th.
As usual the first weeks of Stage 3 are used to feature patches
posted late during Stage 1. At some point unreviewed features
need to be postponed for the next Stage 1.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 4:02 PM Michael Matz via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> > > The idea is so obvious that I'm probably missing something, why autoconf
> > > can't use that idiom instead. But perhaps the (historic?) reasons why it
> > > couldn't be
> Am 24.11.2022 um 17:28 schrieb Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc
> :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Currently I'm looking into a wrong-code bug and would like to understand
> a certain optimization done by combine during local transformation.
> Without LTO I would simply debug cc1 and step through
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 1:03 PM LIU Hao via Gcc wrote:
>
> 在 2022/11/25 17:32, Jakub Jelinek 写道:
> > So just use -masm=intel yourself and don't force it on others.
> >
> > Other people are familiar with AT&T syntax rather than Intel syntax,
> > in fact, as history shows, Intel syntax is a second c
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 12:30 PM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> I've got some instrumentation for logging errors to a magic directory,
> so that I can see if a build triggered them even when it did not
> fail—and hid all compiler errors and warnings.
>
> Unfortunately, some build systems immedi
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 5:39 AM Stephen Smith via Gcc wrote:
>
> I am working on a project which is using an A53 core. The core does not
> raise an exception if there is a division by zero (for either integer or
> floating point division).
>
> The designers chose to set status bits for the float
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 4:41 PM James K. Lowden
wrote:
>
> I don't understand how to access in a front end the arguments to the -I
> option on the command line.
>
> Cobol has a feature similar to the C preprecessor, known as the
> Compiler Directing Facility (CDF). The CDF has a COPY statement th
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 11:49 AM Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 05:53:53PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Am 24.11.2022 um 17:28 schrieb Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc
> > > :
> > >
> > >
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:26 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> On 08/11/2022 11:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> It would be great to have a code example for the construction of the "if
> >> (f()) f();".
> > I think for the function above we need to emit __atomi
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 2:11 PM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> On 05/12/2022 08:44, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:26 AM Sebastian Huber
> > wrote:
> >> On 08/11/2022 11:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>>> It would be great to have a co
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 4:53 PM Alexander Monakov via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Greetings, David, community,
>
> I'd like to get your input on how GCC command line interface should support
> making a "tiered" warning like -Warray-bounds={1,2} an error for "tier 1"
> where fewer false positives are expected, a
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:22 PM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> In the following function, past_end is a pointer to one-past-the-end of the
> array. Holding such a pointer is legal in C. I use it as a sentinel value
> that
> helps (1) avoid overrunning the buffer, and (2) detect tru
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> On 06.12.22 17:08, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Likely. I'd use the gimple_build () API from gimple-fold.h which
> > builds the expression(s) to a gimple_seq creating necessary temporaries
> > on-the-fly and the
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 10:24 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 07.12.22 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 9:51 AM Sebastian Huber
> > wrote:
> >> On 06.12.22 17:08, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> Likely. I'd us
> Am 10.12.2022 um 13:15 schrieb Georg-Johann Lay :
>
>
>
>> Am 09.12.22 um 22:14 schrieb Vladimir Makarov:
>>> On 2022-12-09 14:23, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>>> There is the following code size regression, filed as
>>>
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/PR90706
>>>
>> I am sorry, I feel your frustrat
On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 7:45 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 10:36 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 17:42, Gavin Ray via Gcc wrote:
> > >
> > > This came up when I was asking around about what the proper way was to:
> > >
> > > - Allo
On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 1:02 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2022, 09:12 Richard Biener, wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 7:45 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 10:36 AM Jonathan Wakely v
> Am 13.12.2022 um 17:54 schrieb Claudiu Zissulescu Ianculescu via Gcc
> :
>
> UPDATE:
> The df_analyze_loop is calling the df_set_blocks. Thus, the analysis
> behaves as if the function only contains those blocks and any edges
> that occur directly between the blocks in the set (see df-core.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:37 AM Claudiu Zissulescu Ianculescu
wrote:
>
> I have update the fix to this one:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/df-core.cc b/gcc/df-core.cc
> index a901b84878f..cc6383990a1 100644
> --- a/gcc/df-core.cc
> +++ b/gcc/df-core.cc
> @@ -1437,7 +1437,16 @@ df_analyze_loop (class loop *
c:1273) ?
The point of df_analyze_loop is to be more efficient than doing a
full df_analyze (but of course that's only so in a limited way, still ...)
> Thank you,
> Claudiu
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 1:06 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 20
> Am 14.12.2022 um 18:28 schrieb G.T. via Gcc :
>
> At line 276, lra_assert (spill_class != NO_REGS); would trigger
> whenever execution reached here with spill_class equal to NO_REGS.
> Seems to me that would never happen. Because one of the conditions in
> the if statement right above it (li
On Sun, Jan 1, 2023 at 3:54 PM Nikita Zlobin via Gcc wrote:
>
> Vector extension is great, because allowes to use controllable
> vectorization without dealing with each SIMD ISA separately. When
> properly used, it allowes to get better performance, than with
> auto-vectorization. However, there's
> Am 12.01.2023 um 17:18 schrieb Paul Iannetta via Gcc :
>
> Hi,
>
> I was investigating an ICE (in our yet to be upstreamed back-end which
> has native support for float16), on "gcc.dg/torture/float16-complex.c"
> when compiled with lto:
>
> ./gcc/build/gcc/xgcc -B./gcc/build/gcc/
> ./gcc/
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 5:35 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 12.01.2023 um 17:18 schrieb Paul Iannetta via Gcc :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was investigating an ICE (in our yet to be upstreamed back-end which
> > has native support for float16), o
Status
==
The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is now in
regression and documentation fixing mode (Stage 4) until we
reach zero P1 regressions and branch for the release.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- -
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 5:04 PM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On 1/23/23 08:40, Stefan Puiu wrote:
> According to strict aliasing rules, if you declare a variable of type
> 'struct
> sockaddr_storage', that's what you get, and trying to access it later as
> >
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 12:39 AM Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed SPEC 2017, 511.pov failing for RV64 on bleeding edge gcc.
> This is with -Ofast -march=rv64gcv_zba_zbb_zbc_zbs.
> Problem also happens with -O3 -ffast-math (and goes away with fast-math
> removed)
>
> I've bisected it to
> Am 03.02.2023 um 19:47 schrieb Vineet Gupta :
>
>
>> On 2/2/23 23:36, Richard Biener wrote:
>> There's a CLOSED INVALID bug in bugzilla
>> about the povray failure as well.
>
> Thx for the pointer ! For the record it is
> https://gcc.gnu.org/b
On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 8:37 PM Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Shivansh Khare wrote:
>
>
> > I have looked into the different starter projects that are offered in the
> > [Wiki GSoC page](https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SummerOfCode) and I was
> > particularly interested in the `-ftime-tr
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:31 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> On 2/15/23 14:50, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >While fixing PR 108354, I came across that
> > ssa_name_has_boolean_range calls get_range_query with cfun as the
> > argument but sometimes while in IPA passes cfun is current
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:19 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> Can we use the COMMON symbol __gnu_lto_slim to detect
> -fno-fat-lto-objects on contemporary GNU/Linux (with the LTO linker
> plugin)?
Yes.
> We currently build the distribution with -ffat-lto-objects, and I want
> to switch away
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:28 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Richard Biener:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:19 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Can we use the COMMON symbol __gnu_lto_slim to detect
> >> -fno-fat-lto-object
Status
==
The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is in
regression and documentation fixing mode (Stage 4) until we
reach zero P1 regressions and branch for the release.
We are making slow progress towards this goal, new bugs are
coming in at a high pace.
Please help triaging UNC
On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 6:00 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I want to be able to vectorize divide operators (softfp and integer),
> but amdgcn only has hardware instructions suitable for -ffast-math.
>
> We have recently implemented vector versions of all the libm functions,
> but the lib
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>
> On 22/03/2023 10:09, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 6:00 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I want to be able to vectorize divide operators (softfp
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:57 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>
> On 22/03/2023 13:56, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> Basically, the -ffast-math instructions will always be the fastest way,
> >> but the goal is that the default optimization shouldn't just disable
> >> ve
Joseph can clarify whether unconditionally returning
honor_snans (or false?) for MIN/MAX_EXPR from operation_could_trap_helper_p
would be correct.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Andrew Pinski
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg,
On Tue, 11 Apr 2023, LIU Hao wrote:
> ? 2023/4/11 16:00, Richard Biener via Gcc ??:
> > I think without NaNs MIN/MAX cannot raise any exceptions (I'm not
> > even sure whether MIN/MAX involving NaN will set invalid, but
> > most certainly with sNaN it will trap and retur
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:03 AM Rainer Emrich
wrote:
>
> I did some optimization testing by bootstrapping with "--with-arch=native
> --with-tune=native"
> on an AMD Threadripper system, that's "znver2".
I'm not sure that's really supported, it appears to be not resolved at
configure time at lea
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch is open for regression and documentation fixes.
It's time to do the annual release from the branch, GCC 12.3, and
the planning is to do a release candidate at the start of the first
week of May following with the actual release in the second week.
Please look thro
The third release candidate for GCC 13.1 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.1.0-RC-20230421/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13.1.0-RC-20230421/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r13-7231-gf980561c60b044.
It contains a fix for https://g
The GCC developers are proud to announce a new major GCC release, 13.1.
This release integrates a frontend for the Modula-2 language which
was previously available separately and lays foundation for a
frontend for the Rust language which will be available in a future
release.
Support for emitting
The GCC 12 branch is now frozen in preparation for a GCC 12.3 release
candidate and the release of GCC 12.3 next week.
All changes require release manager approval.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1
The first release candidate for GCC 12.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12.3-RC-20230502/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r12-9504-ga4f604fa194e0c.
I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
x86_64-linux-gnu.
Please tes
> Am 04.05.2023 um 16:35 schrieb Jakub Jelinek :
>
> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 10:31:21AM -0400, Jason Merrill via Gcc wrote:
>> My patch for 106890 caused 109666, so I'd like to revert the 106890 patch
>> (r12-9441-g94569d91bd4c60) for 12.3.
>
> Ok.
> Guess we should do RC2 either tonight or t
The second release candidate for GCC 12.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12.3-RC-20230505/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r12-9512-g27432426d24cf0.
The fix for PR106890 caused PR109666 and was reverted. A read
from uninitialized _M_strin
Status
==
The gcc-12 branch is again open for regression and documentation fixes.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P10
P2 501 - 1
P3 54 + 5
P4
The GNU Compiler Collection version 12.3 has been released.
GCC 12.3 is the first bug-fix release from the GCC 12 branch containing
important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 12.2 with more
than 127 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the WWW servers
> Am 09.05.2023 um 14:16 schrieb Florian Weimer via Gcc :
>
> TL;DR: This message is about turning implicit-int,
> implicit-function-declaration, and possibly int-conversion into errors
> for GCC 14.
I suppose the goal is to not need to rely on altering CFLAGS but change the
default behavior
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2023, 03:32 Eli Zaretskii, wrote:
>
> >
> > And then people will start complaining about GCC unnecessarily
> > erroring out, which is a compiler bug, since there's no problem
> > producing correct code in these cas
> Am 10.05.2023 um 18:31 schrieb Eli Zaretskii via Gcc :
>
>
>>
>> Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 18:02:53 +0200
>> From: Jakub Jelinek
>> Cc: gabrav...@gmail.com, jwakely@gmail.com, fwei...@redhat.com,
>>gcc@gcc.gnu.org, ar...@aarsen.me
>>
>>> If some program is plainly invalid, not j
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:14 PM Kees Cook via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 08:53:52PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 May 2023, Kees Cook via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 06:29:10PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > > > On 5/11/23 18:07, Alejandro Colomar wro
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 1:25 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
> This error pops up in the testsuite for avr.
>
> As far as I understand, this is due to target-specific optimization like
> in avr-common.cc:
>
> { OPT_LEVELS_1_PLUS_NOT_DEBUG, OPT_mgas_isr_prologues, NULL, 1 },
> { OPT_LEVELS_1
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 2:56 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
> PR target/104327 not only affects s390 but also avr:
> The avr backend pre-sets some options depending on optimization level.
> The inliner then thinks that always_inline functions are not eligible
> for inlining and terminates with an er
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 5:44 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 24.05.23 um 11:38 schrieb Richard Biener:
> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 2:56 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> >>
> >> PR target/104327 not only affects s390 but also avr:
> >> The a
> Am 25.05.2023 um 16:22 schrieb Georg-Johann Lay :
>
>
>
>> Am 25.05.23 um 08:35 schrieb Richard Biener:
>>> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 5:44 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>>> Am 24.05.23 um 11:38 schrieb Richard Biener:
>>>> On Tue,
On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:00 PM Claudio Eterno via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi, this is my first time with open source development. I worked in
> automotive for 22 years and we (generally) were using tricore series for
> these products. GCC doesn't compile on that platform. I left my work some
> days ago a
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:45 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 09:10:53PM +0200, André Günther via Gcc wrote:
> > I noticed that a simple function like
> > auto relu( float x ) {
> > return x > 0.f ? x : 0.f;
> > }
> > compiles to different ASM using GCC11 (or lower)
Status
==
The gcc-13 branch is open for regression and documentation fixes.
It's time to plan for a GCC 13.2 release which should follow
roughly two to three months after the .1 release. The plan is
to do a release candidate for GCC 13.2 on Thursday, Jul 20th
with the release following a w
Status
==
The gcc-10 branch is open for regression and documentation fixes.
The last release from the branch, GCC 10.5, before it is being
closed is due. There will be a release candidate next week,
Friday, June 30th followed by the actual release a week later
on July 7th.
Please check if
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 11:36 AM Pierrick Philippe
wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm trying to get the gimple * associated to the definition of a given
> var_decl.
> Basically, I am iterating over the locals of a function (through the
> local_decls member) and I need to be able to get the gimple * o
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 12:07 PM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I'm working on an updated version of my translation validator [*], and I
> have some problems with CLOBBER(eol).
>
> I currently treat CLOBBER(eol) as making the memory invalid (i.e. all
> subsequent accesses is undefined beha
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 5:47 PM Michael Matz via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2023, Krister Walfridsson via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Type safety
> > ---
> > Some transformations treat 1-bit types as a synonym of _Bool and mix the
> > types
> > in expressions, such as:
> >
> >_2;
>
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 2:06 PM Krister Walfridsson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > The thing with signed bools is that the two relevant values are -1 (true)
> > and 0 (false), those are used for vector bool components where we also
> > ne
Status
==
The gcc-10 branch is frozen for release and closing.
All changes require release manager approval.
Previous Report
===
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2023-June/241839.html
The first release candidate for GCC 10.5 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.5.0-RC-20230630/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
r10-11483-g8c12c47d0c5c40.
I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
x86_64-linux.
Please tes
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 8:44 PM Joern Rennecke wrote:
>
> I haven't worked with these targets in years and can't really do sensible
> maintenance or reviews of patches for them.
> I am currently working on optimizations for other ports like RISC-V.
>
> ARC has still an active maintainer in Claudiu
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 5:14 PM Sylvain Noiry via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Sylvain, I am an intern at Kalray and I work on improving the GCC
> backend for the KVX target. The KVX ISA has dedicated instructions for the
> handling of complex numbers, which cannot be selected by GCC due to
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 1:23 AM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I have implemented support for uninitialized memory in my translation
> validator. But I am not sure how well this corresponds to the GIMPLE
> semantics, so I have some questions...
>
> My implementation tracks uninitialized bit
The GNU Compiler Collection version 10.5 has been released.
GCC 10.5 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 10 branch
containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in
GCC 10.4 with more than 155 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This is also the last release from the GCC 10 branch,
After the GCC 10.5 release the GCC 10 branch is now closed.
Thanks,
Richard.
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:15 PM Daria Shatalinska via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> My name is Daria Shatalinska and I am a Project Manager at Freelancer. I am
> contacting you to see if you might be interested in collaborating with us
> on a project for NASA's Open Innovation Services program (NOIS2)
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 12:56 AM Krister Walfridsson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >> I have implemented support for uninitialized memory in my translation
> >> validator. But I am not sure how well this corresponds to the GIMPLE
> >>
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 10:29 AM Krister Walfridsson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >> With "plain copies", do you mean treating it as it is always defined? That
> >> would prevent optimizations such as transforming
> >>
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:36 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> How does the Coldfire m68k subtarget and sure that displacements in PIC
> code are within the addressable range?
There is usually a branch shortening pass relying on correct
instruction lengths.
I suggest to file a bugreport with
The GNU Compiler Collection version 13.2 has been released.
GCC 13.2 is the first bug-fix release from the GCC 13 branch containing
important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 13.1 with more
than 58 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the WWW servers
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 2:57 PM Changbin Du via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello, folks.
> This is to discuss Gcc's heuristic strategy about Predicated Instructions and
> Branches. And probably something needs to be improved.
>
> [The story]
> Weeks ago, I built a huffman encoding program with O2, O3, and PGO
On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 8:30 PM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Structures with flexible array members have restrictions about being
> used in arrays or within other structures, as the size of the enclosing
> aggregate type would be... inconsistent.
>
> In general, sizeof(flexible_str
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 1:38 PM MegaIng via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I am currently in the process of porting gcc to an ISA I designed with a
> few others (spec [1]). Using the old ggx/moxie tutorial as a guideline
> and looking at the source of other backends, as well as the quite decen
> Am 29.08.2023 um 16:30 schrieb Ben Boeckel via Gcc :
>
> Hi,
>
> I tried adding isl 0.26 to a 13.2 GCC build using Iain's macOS aarch64
> patches:
>
>https://github.com/iains/gcc-13-branch
>
> It seems that the bootstrap's `CXX='g++ -std=c++11'` confuses isl's
> build where C++17 is e
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Hi,
> I was reading some code in tree-vect-patterns.cc and I came across
> vect_recog_mixed_size_cond_pattern . The code tries to handle
> comparisons from COND_EXPR but that cannot happen any more (after
> r13-707-g68e0063397ba82).
> Should this code
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Hi, I start to enable "vect" testsuite for RISC-V.
>
> I have a question when analyzing the 'wrapv-vect-reduc-dot-s8b.c'
> It failed at:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/wrapv-vect-reduc-dot-s8b.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> "vect_recog_dot_prod_pattern: det
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
> >> To fix it, is it necessary to support 'vec_unpack' ?
> >
> > both same units would be sext, not vec_unpacks_{lo,hi} - the vectorizer
> > ties its hands by choosing vector types early and based on the number
> > of incoming/outgoing vectors it chooses on
e of how useful it would be.
Richard.
>
>
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
> From: Robin Dapp
> Date: 2023-08-30 16:06
> To: Richard Biener; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> CC: rdapp.gcc; gcc
> Subject: Re: Question about wrapv-vect-reduc-dot-s8b.c
> >> To fix it, is it necess
ode' target hook?
That's not how it's currently designed to work - there's
the autovectorize_vector_modes hook where you should provide a vector
of modes the vectorizer iterates over and return VECT_COMPARE_COST
if you want to evaluate costs between choices. Your analysis should
t
v v4,0(a4)
> add a0,a0,a3
> add a1,a1,a3
> add a4,a4,a3
> bne a2,zero,.L3
> .L5:
> ret
>
> I am experimenting whether we can adjust cost statically to make loop
> vectorizer use LMUL = 4 even though preferred_simd_mode return LMUL = 8.
> If we can do that, I think we can ap
,v4,v8
> sub a2,a2,a5
> vsetvli zero,a5,e32,m4,ta,ma
> vse32.v v4,0(a4)
> add a0,a0,a3
> add a1,a1,a3
> add a4,a4,a3
> bne a2,zero,.L3
>
> Fantastic architecture of GCC Vector Cost model!
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
>
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
> From: Richard Bi
2301 - 2400 of 2622 matches
Mail list logo
