https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104147
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103685
--- Comment #5 from Vitaly Chikunov ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #4)
> Seems to be fixed on trunk for gcc 12; feel free to reopen if this reoccurs
> with gcc 12 onwards.
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
--- Comment #28 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
>
> --- Comment #26 from Martin Sebor ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104157
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
D:\hg\fast_io\examples\0001.helloworld>aarch64-linux-android-g++ -o helloworld
helloworld.cc -Ofast -std=c++23 -s -flto -I../../include -Wall -stdlib=libc++
-std=c++2b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104157
Bug ID: 104157
Summary: libc++ does not work properly with x86_64-w64-mingw32
host, but works fine with x86_64-linux-gnu host
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIR
-enable-languages=c,c++,lto --enable-checking-yes --enable-multiarch
--prefix=/scratch/software/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.1 20220120 (experimental) [master -g30f2c22de] (GCC)
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101785
--- Comment #7 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 52252
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52252&action=edit
android issues fix. Fix aarch64-linux-android target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like clang does not always do access checking for static functions calls
inside requires. I know GCC has a bug there for dealing with caching in the
wrong context (I don't have the bug #).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang fails the static_assert with this one but that does not make sense
at all:
class A{
static void f();
};
template concept t = requires{ A::f(); };
static_assert( !t );
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104141
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Access to private member|nested requires statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101785
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> *** Bug 104155 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I have finished the patch basically. I think i can submit one and let you
review for android aissues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101428
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
Target|aarch64-l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101428
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC 9 emitted it as:
(reg:SI 95 [ x ])
(asm_operands:SI ...
While GCC 10 would emit it as:
(set (reg:CC 66 cc)
(asm_operands:CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101785
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 104155 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104155
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104155
Bug ID: 104155
Summary: hwasan does not compile with aarch64-linux-android
target
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104154
Bug ID: 104154
Summary: [12 Regression] Another ICE due to recent ifcvt
changes
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102338
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.5 |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
> 1. According to ABI, uint128 is passed by 2 gpr, and there should be extra
> cost for _11 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(a_3(D));
And no scalar_cost is needed for
BIT_FIELD_REF 1 times scalar_stmt costs 4 in body
BIT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
Also there's separate issue, codegen for below is not optimal
gimple:
_11 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(a_3(D))
asm:
mov QWORD PTR [rsp-24], rdi
mov QWORD PTR [rsp-16], rsi
movdqa xmm0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
172_1 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
173_2 1 times scalar_store costs 12 in body
174__builtin_bswap64 (_8) 1 times scalar_stmt costs 4 in body
175__builtin_bswap64 (_10) 1 times scalar_stmt costs 4 in b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104139
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104033
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104145
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
with -fno-tree-vectorize, gcc also produce optimal code.
mov rax, rsi
mov rdx, rdi
bswap rax
bswap rdx
ret
Guess it's related to vectorizer cost model.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
(In repl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103655
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> I'm not interested in supporting a dead proprietary OS that even the vendor
> no longer supports. Libstdc++ will still work on XP for the most part. If a
> brand ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 52250
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52250&action=edit
A patch to restore x32 build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104152
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note -msve-vector-bits=scalable is the default :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104152
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97832
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
Bug ID: 104153
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE due to recent ifcvt changes
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94362
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103685
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104152
Bug ID: 104152
Summary: ICE with -Ofast -march=armv8.2-a+sve
-msve-vector-bits=scalable
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94362
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4b8f3730a80025192fdb485ad2535c165340e41
commit r12-6782-gc4b8f3730a80025192fdb485ad2535c165340e41
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103685
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5a9d76be849b4cf20b1b687febc34a937381dc3
commit r12-6781-gf5a9d76be849b4cf20b1b687febc34a937381dc3
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-20
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151
Bug ID: 104151
Summary: x86: excessive code generated for 128-bit byteswap
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104150
Bug ID: 104150
Summary: New test case gcc.dg/analyzer/pr104089.c fails after
its introduction in r12-6700
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103692
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103692
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31677c2cbd1b725e7f46d6cc7c3353f0e4748f32
commit r10-10410-g31677c2cbd1b725e7f46d6cc7c3353f0e4748f32
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103874
--- Comment #11 from Aurelien Jarno ---
Thanks for the patch! I confirm the issue is fixed on the trunk. I also tried
to apply it on the GCC 11 branch (which is basically renaming dwarf2out.cc into
dwarf2out.c in the patch) and this also works f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
We probably just need to add amd64p32 to the go:build and +build lines in
libgo/go/runtime/panic32.go. But I don't have a way to test that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101391
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from Gaius Mulley ---
> Comment on attachment 51457
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51457
> Additonal patch providing cgetopt_*
>
> All done - th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103692
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0351d851f791d81d85d4c366755e0662ea67dc97
commit r11-9483-g0351d851f791d81d85d4c366755e0662ea67dc97
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104127
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103695
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102621
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d2ad748eeef0dd260f3993b8dcbffbded3240a0a
commit r12-6780-gd2ad748eeef0dd260f3993b8dcbffbded3240a0a
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103695
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d2ad748eeef0dd260f3993b8dcbffbded3240a0a
commit r12-6780-gd2ad748eeef0dd260f3993b8dcbffbded3240a0a
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104149
Bug ID: 104149
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20220120 ftbfs in gotools on
x86_64-linux-gnux32
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100488
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104147
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||3.2.3
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101405
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101405
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc01cd9397fe99e707bcc5b98bb33d807ba610d7
commit r12-6779-gcc01cd9397fe99e707bcc5b98bb33d807ba610d7
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102338
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102338
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:30b38394b482ce894d9bc81731a0eea8711f4587
commit r12-6778-g30b38394b482ce894d9bc81731a0eea8711f4587
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52247
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52247&action=edit
gcc12-pr104148.patch
I guess I could use opt_code instead of bool, but
1) I think we still want not to bother
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52244|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102338
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I suspect the unwanted suppression is because check_function_argument_recurse()
calls warning_suppressed_p (param) instead of warning_suppressed_p (param,
) (for each of the warnings it checks). So any other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102338
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52245
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52245&action=edit
gcc12-pr104148.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40505
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92479
--- Comment #13 from David Binderman ---
While there are no occurrences of this problem in the gcc source code,
I count six of them in the current Linux kernel source code (v5.16).
Which is more than I would have thought. So this problem does
oc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-20
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92479
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99487
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104136
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 52244
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52244&action=edit
Patch to mark XXSPLTIW and XXSPLTIDP as possibly being prefixed
If you compile module_advect_em.F90 with -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
check_function_arguments_recurse does multiple things, but I think -Wformat
when discovering the string literals shouldn't really care whether
TREE_NO_WARNING is set or not, the warning should be driven by T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103631
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103631
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] ICE in |[11 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104148
Bug ID: 104148
Summary: [11/12 Regression] -Wformat warning no longer warns
about () wrapped args since r11-2457
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103631
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f34d7ef3d026cf7109b6e6bb2eca14c840e7c71
commit r12-6777-g2f34d7ef3d026cf7109b6e6bb2eca14c840e7c71
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For instructions that inherently set a condition code register, the
@code{compare} operator is always written as the first RTL expression of
the @code{parallel} instruction pattern. For example,
@smallexa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65010
pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102740
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103299
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102740
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102538
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|ppalka at gcc do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101391
--- Comment #6 from Gaius Mulley ---
Comment on attachment 51457
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51457
Additonal patch providing cgetopt_*
All done - thanks for the patch and apologies for the delay in applying.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104147
Bug ID: 104147
Summary: C preprocessor may remove the standard required
whitespace between the preprocessing tokens
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the:
Successfully matched this instruction:
(set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(compare:CCZ (and:QI (reg:QI 143)
(reg:QI 145))
(const_int 0 [0])))
Successfully matched this instruction:
(set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We have:
Trying 17 -> 130:
17: {r124:QI=r143:QI&r145:QI;clobber flags:CC;}
REG_DEAD r145:QI
REG_DEAD r143:QI
REG_UNUSED flags:CC
130: flags:CCZ=cmp(r124:QI,0)
Successfully matched this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19336
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99770
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems it goes wrong during combine, before combine we have:
(insn 17 16 131 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:QI 124 [ _199 ])
(and:QI (reg:QI 143)
(reg:QI 145)))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 103121, which changed state.
Bug 103121 Summary: [12 Regression] Warnings in cp/optimize.c causing build
failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101885
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
setne %sil
andl%esi, %edx
xorl%esi, %esi
cmovne %edi, %ecx
cmovne %esi, %eax
looks wrong, xorl will always set ZF.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90151
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Reconfirmed in 2021 too, also on LNT. The best way to see current
status is probably to go to
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/branch?sorting=gcc-7%2Cgcc-8%2Cgcc-9%2Cgcc-10%2Cgcc-11%2C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103686
--- Comment #11 from Will Schmidt ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #10)
> It turns out not to be undocumented -- but I'd like to remove it anyway.
> Any objections?
Realistically I believe I was the only user of that feature, was to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Gaius Mulle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103121
--- Comment #26 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #25)
...
> I also don't get the warning anymore on trunk.
>
> Is there still an issue here?
The strlen pass was converted to Ranger in
g:6b8b959675a3e14cfdd2145bd62
1 - 100 of 242 matches
Mail list logo
