https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109072
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #1)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #0)
> > The SLP costs went from:
> >
> > Vector cost: 2
> > Scalar cost: 4
> >
> > to:
> >
> > Vector
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109086
--- Comment #1 from liwei at loongson dot cn ---
Created attachment 54632
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54632&action=edit
try to fix builtin_strcmp bug patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109086
Bug ID: 109086
Summary: Bug of builtin_strcmp in the case of using the adddi3
instruction patterns
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109076
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
Sorry I meant it does not compile what I think is valid code:
subroutine i_expand matches the given abstract interface exactly, I can't find
a shape mismatch. I wound two ways that will make the error go away:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109069
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108874
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109074
--- Comment #7 from Murugesan Nagarajan ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The reason for the abort is because you didn't catch the exception as
> libstc++ is throwing one because threads are not enabled at runtime via the
> linki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109074
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
> what(): Enable multithreading to use std::thread:
It explicitly says what needs to be done. And to enable multithreading on
gnu/Linux you use -pthread option or link against libpthread.
Newer gnu/Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109074
--- Comment #5 from Murugesan Nagarajan ---
(In reply to Murugesan Nagarajan from comment #4)
> Thank you for your comment.
> I feel that there WAS a bug in old libc library.
> I am not sure if current libc version having this bug or not.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109074
--- Comment #4 from Murugesan Nagarajan ---
Thank you for your comment.
I feel that there WAS a bug in old libc library.
I am not sure if current libc version having this bug or not.
-
01. external library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109080
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109076
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108099
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.0
Summary|[12/13 Regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108099
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2fc55f51f9953b451d6d6ddfae23379001e6ac95
commit r13-6569-g2fc55f51f9953b451d6d6ddfae23379001e6ac95
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108566
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
This is https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/139
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108542
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:68c5d92a1390ecccb61d3600a95eeff6caf7ccdf
commit r13-6568-g68c5d92a1390ecccb61d3600a95eeff6caf7ccdf
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103934
Thomas Rodgers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322
Bug 88322 depends on bug 103934, which changed state.
Bug 103934 Summary: std::atomic_flag: multiple C++20 functions missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103934
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103934
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Thomas Rodgers
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1784d252cecb0c8f4025ee587af4c29cc0992923
commit r12-9238-g1784d252cecb0c8f4025ee587af4c29cc0992923
Author: Thomas W Rodge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103934
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Thomas Rodgers
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fb4a9bbdf3278fb3d48b840652eb34583d1606e
commit r11-10567-g6fb4a9bbdf3278fb3d48b840652eb34583d1606e
Author: Thomas W Rodg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82480
--- Comment #6 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
Never mind. Wrong bug report. Ignore comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109080
--- Comment #2 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
A cannot update, but on https://godbolt.org I found 12.2 was available, and
it worked there, so I suppose this can be closed.
Program returned: 0
Program stdout
&ARGS
LINES="Xx","Yy","Zz",
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109081
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
Here's what I got from wiki for the history of ABM and LZCNT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_Bit_manipulation_instruction_set
--quoted from wiki---
Intel and AMD use AMD's ABM flag to indicate LZCN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108874
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #54629|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108874
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 54629
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54629&action=edit
Patch but need to add testcases
here is the patch which adds the define_split to aarch64 md file that helps
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108566
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Can be fixed with -ffloat-store, so likely a better x87 precision that is
triggered since the mentioned revision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109085
Bug ID: 109085
Summary: [13 Regression] Maybe a wrong code in fmt package
since r13-6361-g8020c9c42349f51f
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109084
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
template
class MyClass {
private:
static constexpr bool cond = true;
public:
MyClass(T) requires cond;
};
MyClass c{0};
The problem seems to be that the access context during satisfaction of #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109084
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108874
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (set (reg:SI 98)
> (ior:SI (and:SI (lshiftrt:SI (reg/v:SI 97 [ x ])
> (const_int 8 [0x8]))
> (const_int 16711935 [0xff00ff]))
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109065
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108099
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109079
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #2 from Uroš
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108542
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107168
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108972
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107897
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108971
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108773
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108773
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e0324e2629e25a90c13c68b4eef1e47b091970c3
commit r13-6566-ge0324e2629e25a90c13c68b4eef1e47b091970c3
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108400
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
commit r13-6565-g4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102671
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
commit r13-6565-g4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105755
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
commit r13-6565-g4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108251
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
commit r13-6565-g4214bdb1d77ebee04d12f66c831730ed67fedf55
Author: David Malcolm
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107087
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107087
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 54628
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54628&action=edit
Gzipped preprocessed output
Similar errors for this code with -std=c++20 -O2:
#include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58331
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 54627
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54627&action=edit
Latest patch
This patch fixes the testcases in this PR.
I tried other testcases that use coarrays,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109083
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Summary|Incorrect stati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109084
Bug ID: 109084
Summary: requires keyword can't access private static constexpr
bool in templated class
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109083
Bug ID: 109083
Summary: Incorrect static_assert shown in diagnostics
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108994
--- Comment #14 from Tom Stellard ---
Better stack trace with line numbers as of gcc commit
288bc7b5d17511d1791899e4b2e3bf3489eb06dd.
#0 0x016c96aa PrintStackTraceSignalHandler(void*) Signals.cpp:0:0
#1 0x016c9c18 SignalHandl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109024
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109024
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:065c93b89c5e97dcbfd79ee5172cf6800c286896
commit r13-6561-g065c93b89c5e97dcbfd79ee5172cf6800c286896
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108362
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108362
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:95827e1b9f7d5dd5a697bd60292e3876a7e8c15c
commit r13-6560-g95827e1b9f7d5dd5a697bd60292e3876a7e8c15c
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56456
Bug 56456 depends on bug 108980, which changed state.
Bug 108980 Summary: [13 Regression] Warning text missing the warning itself
(GCC 13)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c6232ba229a4fcd453b50f11351fcbd35296809c
commit r13-6559-gc6232ba229a4fcd453b50f11351fcbd35296809c
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107572
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107572
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3df9760d56662bdf38dd45f7398f003bbd64fdfe
commit r13-6558-g3df9760d56662bdf38dd45f7398f003bbd64fdfe
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109080
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-03-09
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104332
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108980
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109079
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109072
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109065
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109039
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-03-09
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109039
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think the bug is in class.cc (end_of_class), which does:
offset = size_binop (PLUS_EXPR, byte_position (field), size);
That works fine for non bit-fields, but for bit-fields it is sometimes
incorre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109069
--- Comment #5 from John Platts ---
Here is another test program that shows the same code generation bug when a
splat followed by a vec_sld is incorrectly optimized by gcc 12.2.0 on
powerpc64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gnu with the -mcpu=po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108994
--- Comment #13 from Tom Stellard ---
(In reply to Tom Stellard from comment #12)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=6e80a1d164d1f9 is the first
> bad commit.
This commit also causes segfaults on s390x, but during frame registrati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109072
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Following an off-list discussion: maybe one option (for now) would
be to make the aarch64 builtins lowering code look for vld1s whose
arguments are ADDR_EXPRs of local VAR_DECLs (or maybe even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109071
--- Comment #3 from Kees Cook ---
Is there a viable path to a solution here? This seems to cause enough false
positives with -Warray-bounds that at least Linux can't enable the flag. I'd
really like to have it enabled, though, since it finds ple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108882
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f366fdfeec0af6cda716de913c32e48f9b1e3a0e
commit r13-6557-gf366fdfeec0af6cda716de913c32e48f9b1e3a0e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109069
--- Comment #4 from John Platts ---
Here is another test program that exposes the optimization bug with applying
the vec_sl operation to a constant vector (which generates incorrect results on
both big-endian and little-endian POWER10 when compi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109082
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
_mm_slli_si128's __result = vec_sld (__zeros, (__v16qu) __A, (16 - _imm5)); has
similar problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109082
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109069
--- Comment #3 from John Platts ---
Here is another test program that reproduces the vector truncation test issue:
#pragma push_macro("vector")
#pragma push_macro("pixel")
#pragma push_macro("bool")
#undef vector
#undef pixel
#undef bool
#incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109082
--- Comment #1 from Mathieu Malaterre ---
Looks like a typo:
% head -1624
/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/lib/gcc/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/13/include/emmintrin.h |
tail
__v16qu __result;
const __v16qu __zeros = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109082
Bug ID: 109082
Summary: emmintrin.h:1624:16: error: argument 3 must be a
literal between 0 and 15, inclusive
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109066
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105841
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.0
Summary|[12/13 Regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102529
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102529
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:afe1f0c251d0429069c2414d4f3f14042efc174f
commit r13-6556-gafe1f0c251d0429069c2414d4f3f14042efc174f
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105841
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9e6170098d5e7756e85e880f8f4cb18e885a64fd
commit r13-6555-g9e6170098d5e7756e85e880f8f4cb18e885a64fd
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10
Stam Markianos-Wright changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stammark at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105841
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:148cbb153dafd6b21d83c00787acd430aec68a3d
commit r13-6553-g148cbb153dafd6b21d83c00787acd430aec68a3d
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107299
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I can build trunk without --enable-checking=release now, but I get some FAILs
in the libstdc++ testsuite:
during GIMPLE pass: threadfull
/home/test/src/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/20_util/to_chars/float12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109081
Bug ID: 109081
Summary: Confusion between FEATURE_LZCNT and FEATURE_ABM in
i386 cpuinfo
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109072
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #3)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #2)
> > I thought the SLP algorithm was bottom up and stores were
> > already sinks?
> Yeah, they are. But th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #20 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Yong :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d11e088210a551235d3937f867ee1c8b19d02290
commit r13-6552-gd11e088210a551235d3937f867ee1c8b19d02290
Author: Costas Argyris
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109039
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And there doesn't even have to be any NSDMI, even
struct X {
short x0 : 7;
short x1 : 8;
X () : x0 (1), x1 (2) {}
int get () { return x0 + x1; }
};
struct S {
[[no_unique_address]] X x;
char c;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109072
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #2)
> I thought the SLP algorithm was bottom up and stores were
> already sinks?
Yeah, they are. But the point is that we're vectorising
the stores i
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
