https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64058
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
[...]
> Can you try out this patch?
It's a bit too much:
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr46032.c scan-tree-dump-not vect "versioning for alias
re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70161
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37918
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37918&action=edit
tentative patch
This patch fixes the ICE, and it seems that correct dot files are produced as
well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #7 from Sebastian Pop ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Note this is both a hoisting and a sinking issue.
> Hoisting should happen before sinking.
> LLVM looks like it only implements sinking.
You are right: LLVM does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note this is both a hoisting and a sinking issue.
Hoisting should happen before sinking.
LLVM looks like it only implements sinking.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to 5738.
Try with -Os and you will see the RTL non PRE based GCSE does most of the job:
foo_p:
fmovs4, 1.0e+0
fdivs0, s4, s0
fsubs1, s1, s3
fsubs2, s2,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Oh and bug 23286.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
"Related to bug 5738."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Pop ---
Right, with -Ofast it be able to optimize away the branch or selects.
The original benchmark had something more complex than fadd to use the tmin and
tmax results. Here is one more test using the results in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #14 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Created attachment 37917
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37917&action=edit
Reduced ldm.i
For cris-elf, repeat with "./cc1 -fpreprocessed -march=v10 -Os
-fno-strict-aliasing -fno-de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70161
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|fdump-i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #13 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #12)
Sorry for the double comments, looks like I have issued with Chrome on top of
all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #12 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Sudip from comment #10)
> So you are suggesting to bisect trunk and
> build gcc and then use that gcc to compile cris allmodconfig to see if that
> bisect was good or bad?
That's what I'll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70161
Bug ID: 70161
Summary: fdump-ipa-all-graph causes segfault
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Sudip from comment #10)
> So you are suggesting to bisect trunk and
> build gcc and then use that gcc to compile cris allmodconfig to see if that
> bisect was good or bad?
That's what I'll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #10 from Sudip ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #9)
> Sorry, this is a reload bug and I can't give it my undivided attention
> within the coming month.
>
> My top-of-the-head solution hypothesis (i.e. what I'd try f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37916
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37916&action=edit
tentative patch, marking failures as xfails
Rainer,
Can you try out this patch?
Thanks,
- Tom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69040
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
Sorry, this is a reload bug and I can't give it my undivided attention within
the coming month.
Reload ties itself in a knot and calls back into the movdi expander asking it
to reload a in=(reg:DI 11 r1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
--- Comment #12 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #11)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #10)
> > I'm trying this now:
>
> This seems to have helped for libgo. I'm still ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61414
Xidorn Quan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||quanxunzhen at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69988
--- Comment #11 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #10)
> I'm trying this now:
This seems to have helped for libgo. I'm still having this issue with libjava
though, so I need some more fiddling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67376
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69520
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #6)
> Hi Jerry,
>
> do you think my suggested patch could be applied before the 6 release?
>
> Thanks,
> Harald
This is my plan. Just out of town for a few days. May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Should this depend on PR70040 as well?
Yes, done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70040
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt ---
I tried implementing Jakub's suggestion to have CONSTANT_ALIGNMENT return 128
for large constructors. This doesn't fix the r201264 version of the test case,
which still generates fairly horrid code. The use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE is due to the gcc_assert in
svn annotate trans-decl.c
...
84542 pbrookif (TREE_CODE (length) != INTEGER_CST)
81764 dnovillo {
81764 dnovillo gfc_finish_var_dec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37039|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68915
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65579
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70160
--- Comment #2 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> -msse2 is needed too. Started with r228231. Can't get rid of the
> uninitialized uses though:
>
> long long a;
> void foo (void);
> void
> bar (unsigned t, int u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70160
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70127
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Looking at the tree dumps, I see weirdo behavior in early SRA (CCing
> Martin), where it changes:
> e.f = 1;
> e.g = 1;
> a[0] = c;
> e = a[0];
> d = e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
--prefix=/home/absozero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160309 (experimental) [trunk revision 234083] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -c -O2 abc.c
$ gcc-trunk -c -O2 abc.c -m32
abc.c: In function 'fn2':
abc.c:19:1: interna
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Martin Reinecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mar...@mpa-garching.mpg.de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70159
Bug ID: 70159
Summary: missed CSE optimization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70155
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #1)
> This can be tweaked in processor_cost table.
RA will use integer registers for TImode.
> However, is SSE move really faster? Cost tables doesn't say so.
Yes, that is w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64324
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61147
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60795
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 54070, which changed state.
Bug 54070 Summary: [4.9/5 Regression] Wrong code with allocatable
deferred-length (array) function results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Bug 20585 depends on bug 54070, which changed state.
Bug 54070 Summary: [4.9/5 Regression] Wrong code with allocatable
deferred-length (array) function results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 49630, which changed state.
Bug 49630 Summary: [OOP] ICE on obsolescent deferred-length type bound
character function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49630
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49630
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69493
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
I still see the problem with:
GCC: (GNU) 6.0.0 20160309 (experimental) [trunk revision 234085]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54070
--- Comment #33 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60795
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49630
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61147
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64324
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:49:58 2016
New Revision: 234093
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234093&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk.
PR fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70157
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > > It is due to TARGET_SSE_TYPELESS_STORES.
> >
> > This is by design, movaps/movu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70157
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > It is due to TARGET_SSE_TYPELESS_STORES.
>
> This is by design, movaps/movups is one byte shorter than movdqa/movdqu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69315
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70049
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70152
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5/6 Regression] gcc|[4.9/5 Regression] gcc ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70086
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70127
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70152
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:12:19 2016
New Revision: 234092
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234092&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70152
* tree-sra.c (replace_removed_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70086
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:06:59 2016
New Revision: 234091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234091&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70086
* config/i386/i386.md (truncdfsf2 splitter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70127
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 9 20:05:40 2016
New Revision: 234090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234090&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70127
* fold-const.c (operand_equal_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70155
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
This can be tweaked in processor_cost table.
However, is SSE move really faster? Cost tables doesn't say so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70157
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> It is due to TARGET_SSE_TYPELESS_STORES.
This is by design, movaps/movups is one byte shorter than movdqa/movdqu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70157
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64058
--- Comment #13 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Stabilizing the sort is just one piece in the problem. SSA_NAME_VERSIONs are
also used as partition numbers. That doesn't seem to impact code generation
(so far), but it does make dump comparisons bloody
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70105
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65579
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68473
--- Comment #15 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 9 18:23:27 2016
New Revision: 234088
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234088&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70105: prevent nonsensical underline spew for macro expansions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70105
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 9 18:23:27 2016
New Revision: 234088
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234088&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70105: prevent nonsensical underline spew for macro expansions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68473
--- Comment #14 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 9 18:14:43 2016
New Revision: 234087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234087&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70105: Defer location expansion until diagnostic_show_locus
gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70105
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 9 18:14:43 2016
New Revision: 234087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234087&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70105: Defer location expansion until diagnostic_show_locus
gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70158
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Can you upgrade your version of gfortran and test
> to see if the code compiles for you. For me, the
> code compiles with 4.9.4, 5.3.1, and 6.0.0
For me too, but I see the ICE with 4.8.5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70158
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70158
Bug ID: 70158
Summary: ICE in small Fortran program with OMP and C_PTR
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
--- Comment #5 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In the -DFOO=0 case, we have peeled an extra copy of the inner loop condition,
i <= max_7, above the loop. scalar evolution (final_value_replacement_loop)
works, because it sees the inner loop go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70146
Richard PALO changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard at netbsd dot org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70157
Bug ID: 70157
Summary: Mismatched __float128 load/store
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70013
--- Comment #10 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmmm, so this fixes the ICE, generating:
SR.5_12 = MEM[(struct S0[2] *)&*.LC0].f0;
MEM[(struct S0[2] *)&*.LC0].f0 = SR.5_12;
d = *.LC0;
d$3$f0_14 = MEM[(struct S0[2] *)&*.LC0 + 3B].f0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69493
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
That's interesting. We have some other examples of similar issues we should
check as well before closing this. I'll take a look in a bit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70156
Bug ID: 70156
Summary: incorrect "incomplete type" error initializing a
static const data member
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
--- Comment #4 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
loopinit introduces the exit phi in much the same way for both -DFOO=0 and
-DFOO=1, so the difference is in sccp.
In the -DFOO=0 case, sccp does this (removing TODO_cleanup_cfg from
pass_data_sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69633
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |bernds at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64989
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|2015-03-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70155
Bug ID: 70155
Summary: Use SSE for TImode load/store
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70127
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37913
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37913&action=edit
gcc6-pr70127-hack.patch
To gather some statistics on what the various changes to operand_equal_p affect
or migh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70127
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 37912
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37912&action=edit
gcc6-pr70127-typecheck.patch
OEP_NO_TYPECHECK patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70138
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 9 16:41:19 2016
New Revision: 234086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-09 Richard Biener
Jakub Jelinek
PR tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70138
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
--- Comment #3 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So in the not-vectorized case (-DFOO=1), we get for the inner loop:
:
# i_27 = PHI
_8 = (long unsigned int) i_27;
_9 = _8 * 4;
_11 = data_10(D) + _9;
_13 = *_11;
_14 = _13 + j_23;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70153
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Slightly cleaned up test case:
void
foo ()
{
unsigned long long int i = 0ULL;
unsigned long long int v;
v = 2ULL * ((1 + (unsigned long int) +1) * i);
}
Note the +1 - without the '+' this problem does
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70130
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69493
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
This seems fixed on current trunk (dse1 removes the reload from mem)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70143
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70123
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #4)
> Created attachment 37906 [details]
> Candidate patch
>
> Jakub, if you have a machine to test this on, can you try this patch? It's
> probably not the full patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70138
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I arrived at the same conclusion, and I was testing the following:
Index: gcc/tree-vect-loop-manip.c
===
--- gcc/tree-vect-loop-manip.c (revi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70052
--- Comment #2 from David Edelsohn ---
Missing "j" constraint in pattern to generate 0.
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
