https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Bug ID: 71351
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71230
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #9 from Artem Polyakov ---
Created attachment 38605
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38605&action=edit
req.s_gcc-5.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #7 from Artem Polyakov ---
I checked with gcc-5.3.0 and I see the same results. Corresponding preprocessed
source and assembly files are attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #8 from Artem Polyakov ---
Created attachment 38604
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38604&action=edit
req.i_gcc-5.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71342
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7 Regression][RL78] set1 / |[6/7 Regression][RL78] set1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #6 from Artem Polyakov ---
BTW, the requested files are posted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #5 from Artem Polyakov ---
Thank you, Marek.
I will check gcc 5.3.
However SLURM is mostly used on RHEL systems and it seems that RHEL is very
conservative about gcc:
RHEL 6.5: gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4)
RHEL 7.3: g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #3 from Artem Polyakov ---
Created attachment 38602
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38602&action=edit
preprocessed source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
--- Comment #4 from Artem Polyakov ---
Created attachment 38603
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38603&action=edit
assembly file (req.s)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71342
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71248
--- Comment #2 from programmerjake at gmail dot com ---
still crashes on 4.8.5:
g++ (Ubuntu 4.8.5-2ubuntu1~14.04.1) 4.8.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71306
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon May 30 22:56:43 2016
New Revision: 236902
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236902&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71306 - bogus -Wplacement-new with an array element
gcc/cp/ChangeL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71248
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67185
--- Comment #6 from Casey Carter ---
ODR-use of different specializations of the same partially-specialized variable
template still trigger the error in GCC 6 (Error: symbol `x' is already
defined):
template
bool x = false;
template
bool x =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70095
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67185
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67248
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71349
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71349
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon May 30 21:40:04 2016
New Revision: 236901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71349
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_for): Don't disall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71349
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon May 30 21:36:24 2016
New Revision: 236900
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236900&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71349
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_for): Don't disall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71350
Bug ID: 71350
Summary: internal compiler error on trailing return type
declaration with initializer list
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71238
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71238
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon May 30 19:18:13 2016
New Revision: 236896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236896&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2016-05-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/71238
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71349
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71349
Bug ID: 71349
Summary: Combined async target clause parsing issues
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71057
Romain Geissler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||romain.geissler at amadeus dot
com
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54882
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71156
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #5)
> With the patch in comment 3, compiling the test
>
> module my_interface
> implicit none
> interface
> module subroutine f
> end subroutine
> e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71099
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71099
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon May 30 15:10:51 2016
New Revision: 236885
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236885&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2016-05-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/71099
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71348
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71008
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from H.J.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70981
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71348
Bug ID: 71348
Summary: [7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 38600
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38600&action=edit
test-case to reproduce
Need to be compiled with -O2 -m32 -march=slm -ffast-math options on x64-64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
Bug ID: 71347
Summary: [7 regression] Performance drop after r235513 on
x86-64 in 32-bit mode.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71289
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Mon May 30 14:37:02 2016
New Revision: 236882
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236882&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
match.pd: optimize unsigned mul overflow check
gcc/
2016-05-28 Al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
--- Comment #13 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 38599
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38599&action=edit
new pr71264.c.147t.vect
Here's the new one, just in case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, it has V4QI, not SImode ... and thus it triggers
if (VECTOR_MODE_P (TYPE_MODE (gimple_expr_type (stmt
{
if (dump_enabled_p ())
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 30 May 2016, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
>
> --- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
- 99.25%32.38% cc1plus cc1plus[.] walk_tree_1
▒ - 66.87% walk_tree_1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71261
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
With the posted patch compile-time is down to <1s for the "at least 15 min"
testcase (the patch forcing bool patterns to be enabled).
Waiting for feedback for some time and then will commit.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71002
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
> Does adding
>
> ptr = __builtin_assume_alinged (alignof (footype), ptr);
> mask = __builtin_assume_aligned (alignof (footype), mask);
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71071
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon May 30 14:00:18 2016
New Revision: 236879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236879&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-30 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71002
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon May 30 14:00:18 2016
New Revision: 236879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236879&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-30 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Does adding
ptr = __builtin_assume_alinged (alignof (footype), ptr);
mask = __builtin_assume_aligned (alignof (footype), mask);
help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, not so useful output from operf w/ frame-pointer (just ran a few minutes).
Looks like it lacks any reasonable cycle handling :/
samples %image name symbol name
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
--- Comment #13 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Right, that was fixed in the immediately following revision,
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=236823
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
--- Comment #12 from Andreas Krebbel ---
(In reply to Ville Voutilainen from comment #11)
> I don't see how any of that code or the failure is in any way related to
> std::tuple...
This was the wrong error message. The bootstrap problem trigger
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71346
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Looks like issue is in split.
This one-liner solves the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
index b348f2d..1267897 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/sse
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71346
--- Comment #1 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Created attachment 38598
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38598&action=edit
Reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71346
Kirill Yukhin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71346
Bug ID: 71346
Summary: [AVX-512] AVX-512VL insn emitted when it is disabled
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71264
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71156
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With the patch in comment 3, compiling the test
module my_interface
implicit none
interface
module subroutine f
end subroutine
end interface
end module
submodule(my_interface) my_imple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71345
Bug ID: 71345
Summary: Warn about redundant conditions
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71344
Bug ID: 71344
Summary: [RL78] Really bad register allocation/utilization
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
Ok, compiling:
int bar = 0;
extern int bar_alias __attribute__((weak, alias("bar")));
main()
{
printf ("%i %i\n",bar,bar_alias);
}
as a static library leads to no dynamic relocations, but compiling as shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71287
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71238
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71335
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70992
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The bad recursion happens between extract_muldiv_1
/* The last case is if we are a multiply. In that case, we can
apply the distributive law to commute the multiply and addition
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
--- Comment #11 from Ville Voutilainen ---
I don't see how any of that code or the failure is in any way related to
std::tuple...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71292
--- Comment #5 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Mon May 30 10:47:57 2016
New Revision: 236876
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236876&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-05-30 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #22 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Mon May 30 10:47:57 2016
New Revision: 236876
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236876&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-05-30 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71269
--- Comment #16 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Mon May 30 10:47:57 2016
New Revision: 236876
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236876&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-05-30 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66338
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #21 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kugan
Date: Mon May 30 10:45:19 2016
New Revision: 236875
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236875&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-05-30 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71343
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71323
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71343
Bug ID: 71343
Summary: missed optimization (can't "prove" shift and
multiplication equivalence)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71341
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71328
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71323
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71341
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milesto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
perf reports (release checking and optimized compiler):
Samples: 6M of event 'cycles', Event count (approx.): 5948147232538
35.46% cc1plus cc1plus[.] walk_tree_1(tree_node**, tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71255
--- Comment #20 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #19)
> On Fri, 27 May 2016, fw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71255
> >
> > --- Comment #18 from Florian Weimer -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69068
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68042
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Mon May 30 09:26:09 2016
New Revision: 236873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-30 Dominique d'Humieres
Backport from tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71342
Bug ID: 71342
Summary: [RL78] set1 / clr1 with !addr16 sometimes doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog
Summary|[6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71335
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71336
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess it could be useful even without lea.
Consider:
int test2 (int a) { return (a & 4) ? 385600 : 123456; }
We emit:
andl$4, %edi
cmpl$1, %edi
sbbl%eax, %eax
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71316
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71328
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 38596
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38596&action=edit
unincluded testcase
Unincluded testcase compiling with GCC 4.8+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71335
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71336
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69067
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71336
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
:
_1 = a_3(D) & 1;
if (_1 != 0)
goto ;
else
goto ;
:
:
# iftmp.0_2 = PHI <7(2), 3(3)>
$op requests
iftmp.0_2 = _1 * 4;
_3 = iftmp.0_2 + 3;
I can see how this is profitable only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71135
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69067
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon May 30 08:05:10 2016
New Revision: 236869
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236869&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport "Remove assert in get_def_bb_for_const"
2016-05-30 To
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
