https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749
--- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon ---
Can you share your configure options?
Also, it looks like you are forcing at least -mfdpic when running the
testsuite?
Why did you put "known to work 9.2", since -mfdpic does not exist in that
version?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749
Bug ID: 91749
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in arm_asm_trampoline_template, at
config/arm/arm.c:3973
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91748
Bug ID: 91748
Summary: doesn't compile std::for_each_n for random access
iterator range
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
>
> That's confusing. Is there anywhere in the documentation or somewhere that
> this could be clarified? Maybe a "Commonly Confused Compiler Options" page
> in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 01:06:12AM +, damian at sourceryinstitute dot org
wrote:
>
> --- Comment #6 from Damian Rouson ---
> Steve, I'm so incredibly glad you posted the details of your workaround.
> Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
--- Comment #6 from Damian Rouson ---
Steve, I'm so incredibly glad you posted the details of your workaround.
Thank you! I had seen the FCFLAG environment variable, but I hadn't noticed the
FFLAG variable listed just a few lines lower in the o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #15 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 12:10:21AM +, manfred99 at gmx dot ch wrote:
>
> c.f:4:15:
>
> 4 | ww=CMPLX(1.0_8, 1.0_8)
> | 1
> Warning: Conversion from REAL(8) to default-kind CO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85185
--- Comment #10 from Jim Wilson ---
It is the same basic problem as before, but more serious. The original
testcase uses a short variable, and can be fixed by adding a cast to int. But
the new testcase does not use any short variables.
There s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
--- Comment #5 from Damian Rouson ---
MPICH must find ISO_Fortran_binding.h in order to build the modern Fortran
bindings that the MPI standard provides through the "mpi_f08" Fortran module.
Gfortran only started providing ISO_Fortran_binding.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #14 from Manfred Schwarb ---
>FWIW, I briefly looked at conversions of complex variables
>and did not find any similar -Wconversion warnings for a patched compiler.
Well, I only looked at REAL,REALPART,AIMAG,IMAG,IMAGPART,DIMAG.
For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:36:20PM +, damian at sourceryinstitute dot org
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
>
> --- Comment #3 from Damian Rouson ---
> So do I need to report thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #13 from Manfred Schwarb ---
FWIW, I briefly looked at conversions of complex variables
and did not find any similar -Wconversion warnings for a patched compiler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:08:52PM +, manfred99 at gmx dot ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
>
> --- Comment #11 from Manfred Schwarb ---
> >> !---LONG not allowed anym
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey Walton ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> You want -no-pie; not -fno-pie.
> -no-pie turns off the linking and -fno-pie just turns off the compiler
> option.
Thanks Andrew.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91747
Bug ID: 91747
Summary: Using a type alias leads to wrong static values.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #11 from Manfred Schwarb ---
>> !---LONG not allowed anymore in gfortran 10 (?):
>> !!ff=LONG(a)
>> !!ff=LONG(b)
>> !!ff=LONG(c)
>> !!ff=LONG(d)
>> !!ff=LONG(g)
>
>LONG was removed by by BOZ patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85185
--- Comment #9 from Zev Weiss ---
I've just encountered another related-looking problem -- the inline asm sees
0xfffc here instead of the intended 0xfffc:
$ cat x.c
static inline void foo(unsigned short n)
{
__asm__("foo %0" :: "r"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91746
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Just for refernce of the C++ standard wording:
[basic.scope.class] paragraph 2:
"A name N used in a class S shall refer to the same declaration in its context
and when re-evaluated in the completed scope of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91746
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91731
--- Comment #3 from Damian Rouson ---
So do I need to report this to the MPICH developers or is a gfortran bug? I
tried "-w -fallow-argument-mismatch" and got the same error message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91745
Bug ID: 91745
Summary: Documentation for __builtin_speculation_safe_value()
doesn't compile
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91746
Bug ID: 91746
Summary: Bogus error due to a type and variable with the same
name
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85482
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Kretz ---
Seems like trunk (10.0.0 20190910) resolves the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85538
Matthias Kretz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91725
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91743
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91740
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83889
--- Comment #4 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Wed Sep 11 20:53:46 2019
New Revision: 275667
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275667&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-09-11 Sandra Loosemore
PR testsuite/83889
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey Walton ---
My bad, this should have been included:
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS
Release:18.04
$ gcc --version
gcc (Ubuntu 7.4.0-1ubuntu1~18.04.1) 7.4.0
Copyrigh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91744
Bug ID: 91744
Summary: -fno-pie is not honored
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401
--- Comment #6 from coypu ---
I imagine I didn't write scheduling for the broken instruction, so it doesn't
ever happen. something silly like that, rather than it being a valid fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91743
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85401
--- Comment #5 from coypu ---
Created attachment 46872
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46872&action=edit
providing instruction scheduling avoids this crash
So, I am trying to beat gcc/vax into shape and incorporate changes f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91553
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Sep 11 18:37:31 2019
New Revision: 275657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275657&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-09-11 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91553
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91642
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Wed Sep 11 18:27:17 2019
New Revision: 275655
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275655&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-09-11 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/91642
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91678
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #7 from Diego Franco ---
This works:
#include
#include
struct A
{
operator const int&() const
{
return a_;
}
int a_;
};
int main()
{
A a {};
const auto& b1 {static_cast(a)};
const int& b2 {a};
assert(&a.a_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #6 from Diego Franco ---
Also the brace initialization works with primitive types for the code I posted
in the first place. That's definitely a code smell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Diego Franco from comment #4)
> It worked on linaro 7.4.1 gcc with c++17, gcc 7.1.0 with c++17 only.
Yes, sometimes old versions have incorrect behaviour and they get fixed.
I agree this is s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #4 from Diego Franco ---
> It's not implementation defined, but I think all implementations are required
> to do what GCC 8 does (and other compilers agree).
It worked on linaro 7.4.1 gcc with c++17, gcc 7.1.0 with c++17 only.
> If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91743
Bug ID: 91743
Summary: ice: tree check: expected ssa_name, have mult_expr in
get_nonzero_bits, at tree-ssanames.c:524
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91738
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
#define assert(C) if (!(C)) { __builtin_puts("Assertion failed: " #C);
__builtin_abort(); }
struct X {
X() { }
X(const X&) { }
};
struct A
{
operator const X&() const
{
return a_;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Diego from comment #0)
> I read through the c++17 standard and did not find any information about
> this behavior being implementation defined.
It's not implementation defined, but I think all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
--- Comment #1 from Diego ---
The code does work when changing std::vector for any primitive types, i.e.
int.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91742
Bug ID: 91742
Summary: User defined conversion references
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
Bug ID: 91741
Summary: Implement new warning -Wsizeof-array-div
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 46871
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46871&action=edit
gcc10-pr91734.patch
Untested patch that does the 2), though for LE_EXPR only.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91740
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91740
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91740
Bug ID: 91740
Summary: ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:2429
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 02:25:23PM +, manfred99 at gmx dot ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
>
> --- Comment #9 from Manfred Schwarb ---
> Hi Steve,
>
> I tried your patch i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Even in the default rounding mode, cases where c2 is equal to zero are clearly
problematic as this testcase shows, but also cases where c is subnormal.
E.g.
sqrtf (x) < 0x1.2dd3d0p-65f is true for x 0x1.63dbc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91497
--- Comment #9 from Manfred Schwarb ---
Hi Steve,
I tried your patch in comment 4, it is a good starting point.
However, SNGL and DBLE still throw warnings:
real*4 a,aa
real*8 b,bb
real*10 c,cc
real*16 d
integer*2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91739
Bug ID: 91739
Summary: Missed optimization for arithmetic operations of
integers and floating point constants
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91738
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Can't really decipher what clang does here. it seems to handle even/odd
lanes separately, doing 24 vpextrb stores per loop iteration. Possibly
simply an interleaving scheme...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91738
Bug ID: 91738
Summary: [10 regression] gcc.target/arm/pr53447-5.c fails since
r274823
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91700
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> The most trivial improvement is likely to recognize the vector parts we can
> store via HImode. There's already support for that but only if we can
> uniformly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
The most trivial improvement is likely to recognize the vector parts we can
store via HImode. There's already support for that but only if we can
uniformly
use HImode and not a mix of sizes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91712
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91732
--- Comment #3 from Jed Brown ---
> why not use gsym[Q*2*j+i] instead of g[j][0] and similarly gsym[Q*2-j*Q+i]
> instead of g[j][1]?
The pattern here is that gsym is packed storage of a symmetric 2x2 matrix,
while g unpacks it so that inner loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
>
> --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Reducing the VF here should be the goal. For the particular case "filling"
> the holes with neutral data and blending in the original values at store time
> will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 91720 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82738
Bug 82738 depends on bug 91720, which changed state.
Bug 91720 Summary: [10 Regression] wrong code with -Og -fno-forward-propagate
-frerun-cse-after-loop -fno-tree-fre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91720
What|Remove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91720
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89435
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 11 11:37:39 2019
New Revision: 275642
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275642&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89435
PR rtl-optimization/89795
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 11 11:37:39 2019
New Revision: 275642
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275642&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89435
PR rtl-optimization/89795
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91720
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 11 11:37:39 2019
New Revision: 275642
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275642&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89435
PR rtl-optimization/89795
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[9/10 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90387
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Sep 11 11:16:54 2019
New Revision: 275639
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275639&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-09-11 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/90387
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
Replacing `if( az
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91736
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Sep 11 10:44:06 2019
New Revision: 275638
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275638&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89795
* rtlanal.c (nonzero_bits1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Sep 11 10:43:19 2019
New Revision: 275637
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275637&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89795
* rtlanal.c (nonzero_bits1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Sep 11 10:42:31 2019
New Revision: 275636
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275636&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89795
* rtlanal.c (nonzero_bits1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89795
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Sep 11 10:41:27 2019
New Revision: 275635
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275635&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/89795
* rtlanal.c (nonzero_bits1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Reducing the VF here should be the goal. For the particular case "filling"
the holes with neutral data and blending in the original values at store time
will likely be optimal. So do
tem = vector load
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91737
Bug ID: 91737
Summary: On Alpine Linux (libmusl) a statically linked C++
program which throws the first exception in two
threads at the same time can busy spin on shutdown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Errr, before we _dont_ vectorize.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91735
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91736
Bug ID: 91736
Summary: Runtime regression for SPEC2000 252.eon on Haswell
around beginning of February 2019
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90767
Bartosz Szreder changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bartosz.szreder@huuugegames
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
So two things:
-funsafe-math-optimizations
assumes there are no denormals (subnormals) or they are flushed to zero.
-ffinite-math-only
assumes that infinite and nans don't exists (IIRC).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91732
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91732
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, openmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91726
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
