https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103463
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103458
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103451
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61713
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mans at mansr dot com
--- Comment #9 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103463
Bug ID: 103463
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE: in
ix86_attr_length_immediate_default, at
config/i386/i386.c:16686 with -Os
-fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-vrp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46476
Bug 46476 depends on bug 103439, which changed state.
Bug 103439 Summary: genemit emits dead code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103439
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103439
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60412
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l_belev at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70274
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60412
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
>
> I wonder how the situation looks on AArch64?
The situation didn't improve, up until the end of stage-1 we were seeing a 6%
perf uplift from somewhere which seems to have gone away now (in a commit ran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46143
Bug 46143 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52555
Bug 52555 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47315
Bug 47315 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45478
Bug 45478 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45325
Bug 45325 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41206
Bug 41206 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38018
Bug 38018 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37394
Bug 37394 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53776
Bug 53776 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39840
Bug 39840 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39787
Bug 39787 depends on bug 37565, which changed state.
Bug 37565 Summary: __optimize__ attribute doesn't work correctly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37565
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102239
--- Comment #7 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
1| Dump of assembler code for function foo:
2|0x15e0 <+0>: rldicr. r3,r3,29,1
3+> 0x15e4 <+4>: beq 0x15f0
4|0x15e8 <+8>: blr
5|0x000
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49946
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96159
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|atomic creates incorrect|atomic creates incorrect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19676
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103462
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103462
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103462
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
bit clear and induction variable could be simplified to `& CONSTANT`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103462
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
Should it be done in vectorizer or ldist(just like memory op), or somewhere
else?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47769
--- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu ---
>
> This is obviously horrible, but the right answer isn't btr in a loop, it's
> what clang does:
>
> movabsq $7905747460161236406, %rax # imm = 0x6DB6DB6DB6DB6DB6 every
> third bit unset
> a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103462
Bug ID: 103462
Summary: vectorizer failed to reduce bit_clear in loop.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103461
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The first one is a dup of bug 103451.
ipa-fnsummary.c:516
19 | }
| ^
0x6d8bdb evaluate_conditions_for_known_args
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-12.0.0_p20211128/work/gcc-12-20211128/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.c:516
0xc4732d do_estimate_edge_size(cgraph_edge*)
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-12.0.0_p20211128/work/gcc-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103461
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
lt
14 | }
| ^
0xeaadef crash_signal
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-12.0.0_p20211128/work/gcc-12-20211128/gcc/toplev.c:322
0x1d1e040 operator_div::wi_fold(irange&, tree_node*,
generic_wide_int const&, generic_wide_int
const&, generic_wide_int const&,
generic_wide_int const&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60070
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
For x86_64, the option was added with PR 70738.
I don't know if this would be an useful option that is general though. Each
target will implement it differently too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61810
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-August/577192.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64992
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102239
--- Comment #6 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> (In reply to luoxhu from comment #4)
> > Simply adjust the sequence of dot instruction could produce expected code,
> > is this correct?
>
> No
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102811
--- Comment #20 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #18)
> (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #17)
> > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
> >
> > > ix86_expand_vector_set is mainly used by vec_set_optab which e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50677
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53875
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53875
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The code which introduced this was
> g:8c6a82695b85f8ed74cdc67f2cf74c5a62d0d91d .
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2003-May/104797.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53875
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||3.3.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102811
--- Comment #19 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #17)
> (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #16)
>
> > ix86_expand_vector_set is mainly used by vec_set_optab which exactly takes
> > target as both input and output, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103460
Bug ID: 103460
Summary: GCC rejected operator[](auto[]...) after P2128
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||strasbur at chkw386 dot
ch.pwr.wro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58270
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50808
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-10-20 00:00:00 |2021-11-28
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46554
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |ipa
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97681
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93008
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65503
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103021
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #7 from Jiangning Liu ---
Without reverting the commit g:1118a3ff9d3ad6a64bba25dc01e7703325e23d92, we
still see exchange2 performance issue for aarch64. BTW, we have been using
-fno-inline-functions-called-once to get the best perform
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19089
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19089
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:68332ab7ec58a89660db82569c5f4c2251d59741
commit r12-5568-g68332ab7ec58a89660db82569c5f4c2251d59741
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24551
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90885
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC should warn about 2^16 |GCC should warn about 2^16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103459
Bug ID: 103459
Summary: Make configury regenerate cleanly with `autoreconf
-Wall`
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103458
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103458
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103456
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81174
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103457
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
Cool, thank you for taking this optimization.
Just to give you a bit of background: I discovered this while converting some
of the enum types in BSD Make to proper bitfields, which theoretically should
be po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90782
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #7 from Andr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced:
template
struct rp {
T* operator->() const;
operator T*() const;
template explicit operator U*() const;
};
struct b {};
typedef void (b::*fptr)();
void foo(rp n, fptr h) {
(n->*h)(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100987
Bug 100987 depends on bug 62157, which changed state.
Bug 62157 Summary: make distclean error when libsanitizer is configured not to
build 'tsan'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62157
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3415
Bug 3415 depends on bug 62157, which changed state.
Bug 62157 Summary: make distclean error when libsanitizer is configured not to
build 'tsan'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62157
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62157
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62157
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:32377c101934477e3d27fec9c6a22f1c97ccf730
commit r12-5566-g32377c101934477e3d27fec9c6a22f1c97ccf730
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103302
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Hello, Jim,
Thanks for the investigation, that's useful. I guess the register allocator
shouldn't choose to coalesce registers when there's a clobber afterwards, or it
should drop the clobber, since othe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103458
Bug ID: 103458
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in verify_loop_structure, at
cfgloop.c:1736 (error: loop with header 4 not in loop
tree)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103457
Bug ID: 103457
Summary: boolean operations on bit-fields are not merged
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
--- Comment #4 from Stephan Hartmann ---
Last working compiler was gcc-8.1, gcc-8.2 and later produce an ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
I am sorry for getting back to this again late. This stage1 we spent some time
with Martin improving the ipa-cp profile updating and looked again into the
realism of the profile. Also recently the codegen has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
--- Comment #3 from Stephan Hartmann ---
Scratch comment 2, copied wrong one:
template
struct raw_ptr {
T* operator->() const;
operator T*() const;
template
explicit operator U*() const;
};
struct bar {};
struct foo {
ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
--- Comment #2 from Stephan Hartmann ---
Handwritten reduced testcase:
template
struct raw_ptr {
T* operator->() const;
template
explicit operator U*() const;
};
struct bar {
static void func();
};
struct foo {
typedef v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 103227, which changed state.
Bug 103227 Summary: [12 Regression] 58% exchange2 regression with -Ofast
-march=native on zen3 since r12-5223-gecdf414bd89e6ba251f6b3f494407139b4dbae0e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101540
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||8.2.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error: in |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103261
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103456
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103456
Bug ID: 103456
Summary: [12 Regression] gcc/gcc.c:9502:8: runtime error: load
of address 0x009f5037 with insufficient space for
an object of type 'const char' since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63691
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103455
Bug ID: 103455
Summary: internal compiler error: in dependent_type_p, at
cp/pt.c:27057
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103448
--- Comment #10 from Janez Zemva ---
The code worked for ((...), (...), ...), but not for ((...)), I did not
understand how a tuple not containing another tuple could possibly be
constructed. On the other hand, I already found a workaround and I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101540
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103454
Bug ID: 103454
Summary: -finline-functions-called-once is both compile-time
and runtime loss at average for spec2006, spec2017 and
tramp3d
Product: gcc
Version:
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo