https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #47 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 07:34:16 2015
New Revision: 231442
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231442&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* ipa-reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25140
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 07:34:16 2015
New Revision: 231442
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231442&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
PR middle-end/25140
* ipa-reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Zonenberg ---
Yes, I am compiling for mips1. I'm targeting a size-optimized FPGA softcore
that doesn't have support for the newer opcodes.
Sounds like you've confirmed the bad code generation then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25140
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Blo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24332
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68809
Bug ID: 68809
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: type
mismatch in binary expression) w/ -O2 (-O3, -Ofast)
-floop-nest-optimize
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #46 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 05:07:18 2015
New Revision: 231440
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231440&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* symtab.c (symtab_node::equal_address_to):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68808
Bug ID: 68808
Summary: "--sysroot" not propagated to linker when "--specs" is
used
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #45 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Dec 9 02:15:05 2015
New Revision: 231438
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231438&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* lto-streamer.h (lto_symtab_merge_decls,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68711
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68711
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Dec 9 01:35:59 2015
New Revision: 231437
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231437&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/68711 - [6 regression] SEGV on an invalid offsetof of a member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68807
Bug ID: 68807
Summary: operator->* returning a temporary T will in some cases
be treated as returning an lvalue
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68806
Bug ID: 68806
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68805
Bug ID: 68805
Summary: ICE while var-tracking in simplify_binary_operation_1
with -g and -mvsx-timode
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67781
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68804
Bug ID: 68804
Summary: Code generated by _addcarry_u64 is wrong in O3 mode
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302
--- Comment #13 from Steve Ellcey ---
Thanks for the trace. I am still not sure I understand what is going on but I
wonder if you could try commenting out this code under the "case 'e'" code in
rtx_equal_for_cselib_1.
#if 0
if (i ==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #44 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 8 22:03:36 2015
New Revision: 231430
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231430&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* lto-cgraph.c (compute_ltrans_boundary): Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #43 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 8 22:02:23 2015
New Revision: 231429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231429&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* varpool.c (varpool_node::get_availability
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #42 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 8 22:01:41 2015
New Revision: 231428
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231428&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* ipa-visibility.c (can_replace_by_local_al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #41 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 8 22:00:55 2015
New Revision: 231427
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231427&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* symtab.c (symtab_node::verify_base): Fix t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
Bug ID: 68803
Summary: [6 regression] gcc.vect/powerpc/20050603-3.c failures
since r230167
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68760
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68785
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #40 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Dec 8 20:46:42 2015
New Revision: 231425
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231425&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/61886
* lto-partition.c (add_symbol_to_partition_1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68802
Bug ID: 68802
Summary: seg fault when non-main thread calls
std::current_exception ARMv7-A
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-12-08 2:53 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> In the case you're running into, I believe he high portion has to be
> considered
> "clobbered" as in we won't know its contents. So I thin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68801
--- Comment #1 from derrick at ca dot ibm.com ---
cmd:
$g++ -O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 test.cpp -o test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68302
--- Comment #12 from Aurelien Jarno ---
Created attachment 36965
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36965&action=edit
Output log
Please find attached the output log of gcc running patched as you requested.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68801
Bug ID: 68801
Summary: __builtin_object_size multiple objects ptr size issue
when adding/removing printf()
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Philip Deegan from comment #17)
> However, if a thread calls std::current_exception it segfaults in
> libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_ptr.cc line 190:
> __cxa_exception *header = globals->caughtExce
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #17 from Philip Deegan ---
Building bin-utils/gcc/glibc with --with-arch=armv7-a did the trick.
Atomic is not required.
However, if a thread calls std::current_exception it segfaults in
libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/eh_ptr.cc line 190:
__c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68292
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Dec 8 18:47:54 2015
New Revision: 231422
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231422&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/68291
PR middle-end/68292
* cfge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68291
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Dec 8 18:47:54 2015
New Revision: 231422
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231422&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/68291
PR middle-end/68292
* cfg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68701
--- Comment #13 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Dec 8 18:41:21 2015
New Revision: 231419
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231419&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68701
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68790
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Candidate patch has been just sent:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00899.html
Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68349
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61240
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68792
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We might also want to use "MAN_EXTENSION = .3c++" in the doxyfile so that we
don't dump all these files in section 3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62630
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc*-sun-solaris2.*, |
|arm*, aarch64*, x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34574
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sparc-sun-solaris2.9|
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46208
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68757
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68002
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68002
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
Bug ID: 68800
Summary: Fortran FE produces many memory leaks
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62254
--- Comment #4 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seems that the solution is to implement TARGET_SECONDARY_RELOAD and remove the
obsoleted reload_in and reload_out patterns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68755
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61047
--- Comment #27 from Eric Botcazou ---
*** Bug 68755 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68786
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68757
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Dec 8 16:57:27 2015
New Revision: 231414
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231414&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/68757: fix uninitialized src_range for various builtins
gcc/c/Cha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
This is a duplicate of PR68464. alpha-linux-gnu is OK [1].
Can someone knowledgeable in c++ please add the testcase from Comment #3 to the
testsuite and close the bug?
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
Bug ID: 68799
Summary: lto ICE on powerpc64le-linux-gnu builing python 2.7.x
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68798
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68791
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to jenda.plhak from comment #2)
> Yes. That was the first thing I did. However we use Tup, but I don't really
> think it is relevant.(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> > Have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62254
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68798
Bug ID: 68798
Summary: x_solve.c:181:9: internal compiler error: in execute,
at cfgexpand.c:6066
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68791
--- Comment #2 from jenda.plhak at gmail dot com ---
Yes. That was the first thing I did. However we use Tup, but I don't really
think it is relevant.(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> Have you rebuild all the object files with 5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68797
Bug ID: 68797
Summary: gcc -m32 does not finish when compiling test cases
from PR66070
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68784
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That is a reasonable design, but it is not the design used by the C++11
standard library. This is not the right place to debate the merits of a very
intentional decision made by a large group of experts aft
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68765
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68796
Bug ID: 68796
Summary: Make use of and-immediate+compare instructions more
robust
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin ---
Created attachment 36961
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36961&action=edit
Dumps
Profilers show that core_state_transition and calc_func indeed became slower
after r228668.
First differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It should work if you build GCC for ARMv7, i.e. configure --with-arch=armv7-a,
but that changes the instruction set used for all the target libraries.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68795
Bug ID: 68795
Summary: [6 Regression] Use of uninitialised value of size 8 in
cp_parser_postfix_expression (parser.c:6831)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68757
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68786
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68786
>
> --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> For normal vectorized stores, the alignment i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #15 from Philip Deegan ---
Hi, thanks for the quick reply.
Yeah I tried with atomic, not much different shared or static, is something
special required when building gcc/libc?
Linking with --verbose results in:
-lmy_lib -latomic -l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68784
--- Comment #6 from Wang Xuancong ---
You are right! I have tested myself. MSVC outputs 0 instead of crashing
(crashing is what we expected), it is accepting compilation but not doing the
job correctly, that it passes a temporarily created copy o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68333
--- Comment #5 from mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to mwahab from comment #4)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > Should be fixed now.
>
> It's still failing for aarch64_be-none-elf.
>
> The test has a dg-skip-if directiv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68333
mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mwahab at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68707
--- Comment #8 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Adding a check against BB SLP avoids some regressions caused by bailing out of
BB SLP when we can't then do a load/store-lanes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68786
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For normal vectorized stores, the alignment is preserved through the
MEM_REF/TARGET_MEM_REF type, e.g.
5991 TREE_TYPE (data_ref)
5992= build_aligned_type (TREE_TYP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68769
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68116
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Dec 8 14:43:32 2015
New Revision: 231412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231412&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/68116
* g++.dg/cpp0x/pr68116.C: New test.
Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68116
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68794
Bug ID: 68794
Summary: an option for -fsanitize= is accepted even if the
corresponding library is not available
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Philip Deegan from comment #13)
> How would one fix this on ARMv7-A for instance?
>
> Compiling with "-march=armv7-a" on arm-linux-gnueabihf results in a link
> error for exception_ptr/curre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68707
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68707
>
> --- Comment #6 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Well, I can confirm that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
Philip Deegan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philip.deegan at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68768
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
PR68640 has been fixed by committing the simple fix, so the status of this PR
has changed from hypothetical to actual.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68672
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Hum. We outline bb 6 and bb 7 in the following (but not bb 8).
| /
ptr_1 = ...;
if ()
| \
|
|/
*ptr_1 = ...;
returnl
so the split part computes ptr_1 but the mai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68640
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68640
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Tue Dec 8 14:17:42 2015
New Revision: 231411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Clear restrict in install_var_field
2015-12-08 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Allan Jensen from comment #6)
> I mean the neon64 case, not 32-bit.
Seems so. I get:
_Z16RGBA2BGRA_neon64PKjPjj:
.LFB3215:
.cfi_startproc
subsw7, w2, #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #6 from Allan Jensen ---
I mean the neon64 case, not 32-bit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68707
--- Comment #6 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Well, I can confirm that the patch generates load-lanes/store-lanes instead of
SLP, all over the (vect) testsuite. All execution tests are passing :) so it
*may* just be a case of updating a lot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #5 from Allan Jensen ---
The test-case uses C++11 initialization. I haven't tested gcc 6, so if you say
it is solved, I would trust you.
Note the 32-bit case is also suboptimal in both cases (not affected by
split-wide-types). Is tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68049
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68721
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 36960
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36960&action=edit
untested fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #3 from Allan Jensen ---
Created attachment 36959
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36959&action=edit
neon-test-no-split-wide-types.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #2 from Allan Jensen ---
Created attachment 36958
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36958&action=edit
neon-test-split-wide-types.s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
--- Comment #1 from Allan Jensen ---
Created attachment 36957
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36957&action=edit
neon-test.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68793
Bug ID: 68793
Summary: Bad optimization by split-wide-type on NEON
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
