https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104550
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to qinzhao from comment #18)
> One question here, for the following testing case:
>
> [opc@qinzhao-ol7u9 104550]$ cat t1.c
> struct vx_audio_level {
> int has_monitor_level : 1;
> };
>
> void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #5)
> >
> > Yes, neg rdx = (0 - rdx) = (0 - (rdx + CF)(last def)) = (sbb 0, rdx)
>
> And we need an extra register for it.
The patch in Comment #6 does a conversion, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 52481
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52481&action=edit
Proposed patch
+;; Convert:
+;; mov %esi, %edx
+;; negl %eax
+;; adcl $0, %edx
+;; negl %edx
+;; to:
+;;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
>
> Yes, neg rdx = (0 - rdx) = (0 - (rdx + CF)(last def)) = (sbb 0, rdx)
And we need an extra register for it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> We get this now:
>
> movq%rdi, %rax
> movq%rsi, %rdx
> negq%rax
> adcq$0, %rdx
> negq%rdx
>
> ICC prod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88197
--- Comment #5 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore w/ gcc 12.0.1 20220220 snapshot
(g:e49508ac6b36adb8a2056c5a1fb6e0178de2439d).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88134
--- Comment #25 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore w/ gcc 12.0.1 20220220 snapshot
(g:e49508ac6b36adb8a2056c5a1fb6e0178de2439d).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51954
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gabravier at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94806
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94898
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The other transformation of "x_2 >= y_3 && x_2 != y_3" into "x_2 > y_3" is
already done by reassociation and has been done since 4.5.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94898
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101805
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103623
--- Comment #31 from Kewen Lin ---
Thanks for the comments, Segher and Peter! Your comments answered my question
in mind that the current unpack/pack pattern supports are complete or not.
IIUC, to cover it for both soft-float and hard-float case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104024
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3)
> Most of those options were removed. Does this problem (adjusted properly,
> those options are now enabled iff you use -mcpu=power10 or later) still
> happen on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Posted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-February/590627.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77693
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77693
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e49508ac6b36adb8a2056c5a1fb6e0178de2439d
commit r12-7305-ge49508ac6b36adb8a2056c5a1fb6e0178de2439d
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104290
--- Comment #25 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> Hopefully someone knows hot to modify Makefile.tpl/Makefile.def to generate
> the correct dependencies in Makefile.in.
I suggest that you open a separate bug for that, with a complete standalone
expl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66193
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.3
Status|ASSIG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66193
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a5088b07e0a547cdacaa6db8ad762fd8c425b1f0
commit r11-9613-ga5088b07e0a547cdacaa6db8ad762fd8c425b1f0
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104608
Bug ID: 104608
Summary: internal compiler error: in cp_parser_template_id, at
cp/parser.cc:18367
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83907
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103027
Reini Urban changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reini.urban at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #18 from Joerg Wunsch ---
(In reply to rudi from comment #17)
> The issue is still there during the bootstrap build, but maybe
> --disable-gcov might help you in your cross compile toolchain too.
Yes, --disable-gcov does help as we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #17 from rudi at heitbaum dot com ---
Hi Joerg,
I saw your comment and took it as a prompt. I fixed the LE toolchain with your
patch. I thought about it further and then used --disable-gcov as the
gcc:bootstrap - leaving HAVE_SYS_MM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vr
29 matches
Mail list logo
