https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104453
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |target
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104451
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Assignee|unassigned at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104376
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104449
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104448
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #35 from Kewen Lin ---
> I don't think the r12-6219 commit qualifies for backporting. What about the
> comment#31 patch? Does it address the issue for Eigen on the branches?
Got it. comment#31 patch can only address the mismatch i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104446
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104445
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Note we generally avoid "folding" undefined to anything specific, but what
could
trigger here is path isolation seeing
if (n >= 0 && n < 32)
;
else
if (m >> n != 0)
...
making the else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104441
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #34 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #33)
> Since this issue affects Eigen building on Power and we have GCC11 and GCC10
> to support Power10 MMA, one of our colleagues is wondering if we can
> backport all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104379
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 8 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104379
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104456
Bug ID: 104456
Summary: nvptx: prevent_branch_around_nothing doesn't handle
asm ("")
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
w/o -pg, there's an error output as expected:
../gcc.target/i386/pr55512-4.c:7:3: error: ‘asm’ operand has impossible
constraints
7 | asm goto ("" : : "r" (x), "r" (x + 1), "r" (x + 2), "r" (x + 3), /*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104376
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104445
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104445
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104451
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
ix86_expand_vector_init expects vals to be a parallel containing values of
individual fields which should be either element mode of the vector mode, or a
vector mode with the same element mode and smaller numb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104451
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
-mavx512f is not necessary, PR can be produced by -mxop -O -mavx2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104438
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #4)
> > It is unclear why the CFG wasn't straightened out here. Is the bb commented
> > as "asm" actually asm? Then GCC will not see it is very cheap/small, yeah.
>
> "
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104438
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
> It is unclear why the CFG wasn't straightened out here. Is the bb commented
> as "asm" actually asm? Then GCC will not see it is very cheap/small, yeah.
"asm" is not inline assembly. it's BB 6 below
(not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104452
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101081
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks. The above patch fixes part (a) of comment #0, but I'm not yet sure
what to do about part (b), so keeping this bug report open for now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101081
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e52a683170877d140eebc9782731eaf11897db71
commit r12-7119-ge52a683170877d140eebc9782731eaf11897db71
Author: Joel Teichroeb
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #32 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #31)
> Created attachment 52383 [details]
> Simpler patch to fix the problem with power8-fusion.
>
> This patch just ignores the -mpower8-fusion option in the callee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104452
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:391512ade5f6cda95456133296c8dcc42d5fbefd
commit r12-7118-g391512ade5f6cda95456133296c8dcc42d5fbefd
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103752
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96876
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96876
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53cac72cf0821217f99d0640ba72cc2999ec7dc0
commit r12-7117-g53cac72cf0821217f99d0640ba72cc2999ec7dc0
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|11.3
Summary|[12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104442
Thomas Rodgers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104455
Bug ID: 104455
Summary: Cannot select -march=armv7-a using GCC 11
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104420
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104452
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104452
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98900
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
GCC 12 issues -Wdangling-poinnter for this bug now at all optimization levels.
It still issues -Wuninitialized at -O1 and above, but with the dangling pointer
warning I don't think it's a big deal. It should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104451
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104077
Bug 104077 depends on bug 81524, which changed state.
Bug 81524 Summary: Bogus or missing warnings when dereferencing pointer to
deallocated stack memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81524
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81524
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93482
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=104355
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104355
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104436
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Summary|spurious -Wdangl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102059
--- Comment #31 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 52383
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52383&action=edit
Simpler patch to fix the problem with power8-fusion.
This patch just ignores the -mpower8-fusion option in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104454
Bug ID: 104454
Summary: filesystem::canonical needs to strip trailing slash
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104446
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104449
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
ux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-7089-20220208123931-g0103c2e4082-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104450
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Component|middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104165
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-7089-20220208123931-g0103c2e4082-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84568
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to palmer from comment #10)
> After signing off last night I realized that none of that would work anyway,
> though, as even with the same library on both ends users would end up with a
> differe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #11 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> (In reply to Hannes Hauswedell from comment #8)
> > Hi, I wanted to ask politely whether you have discussed this issue and came
> > to a conclusion?
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104445
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--
o/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-7089-20220208123931-g0103c2e4082-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
ession algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
082-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104422
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #5)
> Still on GT1030, does not reproduce with 470.x, neither the minimal nor the
> complete for-3.c.
And the same for 510.x.
So, I'm parking this for now. This may w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104153
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d0d4601ccde3c4849f6e7244035f1a899d608cb7
commit r12-7114-gd0d4601ccde3c4849f6e7244035f1a899d608cb7
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Tue Fe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104198
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d0d4601ccde3c4849f6e7244035f1a899d608cb7
commit r12-7114-gd0d4601ccde3c4849f6e7244035f1a899d608cb7
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Tue Fe
1-g0103c2e4082-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220208 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab ---
If you make all-target-libgo all dependencies are respected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104447
Bug ID: 104447
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: maximum number of LRA
assignment passes is achieved (30)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104446
Bug ID: 104446
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE in trunc_int_for_mode, at
explow.cc:59
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104445
Bug ID: 104445
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in vect_create_partial_epilog, at
tree-vect-loop.cc:5098
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #6 from Svante Signell ---
OK, forget about the gotools. The problem is that libgo is built _before_
libatomic and libbacktrace. A Debian error??
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Bug ID: 10
Summary: Missing constant folding in shift expression.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104422
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
Still on GT1030, does not reproduce with 470.x, neither the minimal nor the
complete for-3.c.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104379
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104379
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71e6353e1b03021bc8bbcf4bd67a5f14d09b5fb1
commit r12-7113-g71e6353e1b03021bc8bbcf4bd67a5f14d09b5fb1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104403
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102140
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104403
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1755141a9ea0dddabb52776cddc4c9325eed27c6
commit r12-7112-g1755141a9ea0dddabb52776cddc4c9325eed27c6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102140
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c3e491a4e5ae74bfbed6d167d403d262b5a4adc
commit r12-7111-g0c3e491a4e5ae74bfbed6d167d403d262b5a4adc
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104285
--- Comment #1 from Ye Luo ---
Here is a minimal reproducer.
https://github.com/ye-luo/openmp-target/tree/master/tests/linking/two_identical_templates
$ g++ -fopenmp -foffload=nvptx-none -O3 -c test_a.cpp
$ g++ -fopenmp -foffload=nvptx-none -c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104418
--- Comment #7 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
Thanks. I submitted Clang bug:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53653
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84568
--- Comment #10 from palmer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> > > (In reply to palmer from comment #3)
> > > > I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100354
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In this particular case it is:
(note 38 19 20 (var_location p (unspec:DI [
(const_int 0 [0])
] UNSPEC_TLS)) NOTE_INSN_VAR_LOCATION)
where p's value should be equal to that __builtin_thread_pointe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104410
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> The only issue to resolve is how to make sure libatomic and libbacktrace
> builds in build/i686-gnu before libgo/gotools.
That question doesn't sound right. The gotools are built for the target. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104443
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104443
Bug ID: 104443
Summary: common_iterator::operator-> is not correctly
implemented
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104410
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:411db3b4cf8655ecb5b7d666318546c73f2d156b
commit r11-9544-g411db3b4cf8655ecb5b7d666318546c73f2d156b
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
Makefile.def already has the required dependencies:
dependencies = { module=all-target-libgo; on=all-target-libbacktrace; };
dependencies = { module=all-target-libgo; on=all-target-libffi; };
dependencies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #3 from Svante Signell ---
With the proposed patches everything builds fine. The only issue to resolve is
how to make sure libatomic and libbacktrace builds in build/i686-gnu before
libgo/gotools.
Any ideas? I'm not sure if this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103147
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104442
Bug ID: 104442
Summary: atomic::wait incorrectly loops in case of spurious
notification when __waiter is shared
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Hannes Hauswedell from comment #8)
> Hi, I wanted to ask politely whether you have discussed this issue and came
> to a conclusion?
No, because the current priority is gcc 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104422
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #3)
> Reproduces both with and without GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0.
Pff, that was an artefact of having bumped the default ptx isa to 6.3.
So, let's try again ...
Reproduced w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104441
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 52376
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52376&action=edit
A patch
I am testing this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103904
--- Comment #8 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
Hi, I wanted to ask politely whether you have discussed this issue and came to
a conclusion?
It if it is still being discussed, can you at least "confirm" this issue and
put it on some list for the next
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Schwinge ---
OK! Putting your "nvptx: Add support for 64-bit mul.hi (and other)
instructions" on top, that considerably changes (simplifies!) the generated
'__muldc3' PTX code; the regression disappears. :-)
(I have
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
