https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107533
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #2)
> yes the by-value parameters are a separate issue that I hope recent patches
> on the list (I remember something flying past) should help correct.
The pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107533
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
yes the by-value parameters are a separate issue that I hope recent patches on
the list (I remember something flying past) should help correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116509
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59018
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59018&action=edit
What LLVM produces
This is what LLVM produces. GCC should be able to do similarly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116509
Bug ID: 116509
Summary: 128bit integer compares can be improved
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > part of the problem here is the use of OPTAB_DIRECT when it should use
> > OPTAB_WIDEN instead.
>
> That fixes s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> part of the problem here is the use of OPTAB_DIRECT when it should use
> OPTAB_WIDEN instead.
That fixes short but for char looks like there is still some cost
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
part of the problem here is the use of OPTAB_DIRECT when it should use
OPTAB_WIDEN instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116507
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, the whole `*mov_aarch64` set of patterns are a mess and looks like
they need some cleanup too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
--- Comment #8 from J Lee ---
I agree with you, Andrew.
Now, GCC can't be used to build XSIMD at least RISC-V.
I didn't expect getting such quick and helpful comments like this.
Thanks sergesanspaille and Andrew ! :-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116498
--- Comment #3 from Alan Fisher ---
> It seems odd that neither Pmode nor ptr_mode is in the set of integer modes
> though.
This does seem odd... One would think PSI should sit between HI and SI as here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116410
--- Comment #7 from Xionghu Luo (luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org) ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5)
> Created attachment 59016 [details]
> A patch
>
> Please try this.
Thanks, it works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116473
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #1 from Jian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #13 from kargls at comcast dot net ---
On 8/27/24 12:25, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
>
> --- Comment #12 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to kargls from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116271
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Joern Rennecke :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:beb94f5979953969593a2387561cdbc8fedfaeb1
commit r15-3240-gbeb94f5979953969593a2387561cdbc8fedfaeb1
Author: Joern Rennecke
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114729
--- Comment #16 from Vineet Gupta ---
After ECC hack, the issue persists.
Toggles (for cc1plus): -O2 -march=rv64gc_zfa -mabi=lp64d
%sfp is the spill because
-fno-schedule-insns | -fschedule-insns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114729
Vineet Gupta changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vineetg at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114729
--- Comment #14 from Vineet Gupta ---
Interim update:
Per discussions [1] [2] with Richard Sandiford, some of the behavior is
fundamental to the "model" heuristics of -fsched-pressure, specially for
in-order cores which benefit from little more
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85282
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.mozilla.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > (In reply to J Lee from comment #4)
> > > Is this error also related to the same 'const' issue?
> >
> > No that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> (In reply to J Lee from comment #4)
> > Is this error also related to the same 'const' issue?
>
> No that is unrelated to this attribute issue.
Well the origin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to J Lee from comment #4)
> Is this error also related to the same 'const' issue?
No that is unrelated to this attribute issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
J Lee changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sayhappy at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andi Kleen :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffb00a0da44be946bcac45dd702e18555f564b2e
commit r15-3236-gffb00a0da44be946bcac45dd702e18555f564b2e
Author: Andi Kleen
Date: Tue Aug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #205 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #204)
> Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's because I disabled late combine as one of the
> measures trying to mitigate the segfault.
>
> I am testi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Andreas, do you think the m68k port is ready to try bootstrapping with LRA
enabled by default? It'd be relatively simple to flip it in my tester.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-27
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116508
Bug ID: 116508
Summary: [15 Regression] `popcount(short) == 1` or char no
longer expands to using `(arg ^ (arg - 1)) > arg - 1`
trick after r15-2946-gfcc3af99498804
Product
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116507
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116507
Bug ID: 116507
Summary: [15 Regression] movhi_aarch64 should use fmov if FP16
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
> (In reply to andi from comment #7)
>> Thanks. Updated patch. This one seems obvious so I'll commit soon.
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115905
--- Comment #2 from Artyom Kolpakov ---
I apologize very much. Not having figured out who the actual developer of clang
is, I took third persons opinions as the organization's opinion and used that
to create the further discussion. As it was poi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to andi from comment #7)
> Thanks. Updated patch. This one seems obvious so I'll commit soon.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-ifcvt-1.c
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-sw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114224
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Note after r15-2946-gfcc3af99498804, for:
> ```
> int fc(unsigned char a)
> {
> return __builtin_popcountg(a) == 1;
> }
> ```
>
> Without CSSC, GCC produces:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #7 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
Thanks. Updated patch. This one seems obvious so I'll commit soon.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-ifcvt-1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-ifcvt-1.c
index f5352ef8ed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114224
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note after r15-2946-gfcc3af99498804, for:
```
int fc(unsigned char a)
{
return __builtin_popcountg(a) == 1;
}
```
Without CSSC, GCC produces:
```
and w0, w0, 255
fmovd31, x0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109867
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Arsen Arsenovic :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff0cba200af72f2514ebc987a99027f314d4cc99
commit r15-3234-gff0cba200af72f2514ebc987a99027f314d4cc99
Author: Arsen ArsenoviÄ
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #4)
> It seems sparc doesn't support comparisons in vectorization?
I think you want to check vect_condition for this. (like bb-slp-69.c )
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #4 from Andi Kleen ---
It seems sparc doesn't support comparisons in vectorization?
/vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-ifcvt-1.c:13:7:
missed: not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: _13 = _1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116506
Bug ID: 116506
Summary: [15 Regression] Destructors of temporary awaitables
are executed too early
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95701
Carlos Galvez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carlosgalvezp at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
Bug 113939 depends on bug 116413, which changed state.
Bug 116413 Summary: [LRA] [M68K] ICE: unrecognized insn in
lra_set_insn_recog_data, at lra.cc:1036
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116413
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116413
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116413
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andreas Schwab :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a83e519ab2d4e7df2756411cd9d21c6f1b583429
commit r15-3233-ga83e519ab2d4e7df2756411cd9d21c6f1b583429
Author: Andreas Schwab
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106294
Carlos Galvez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carlosgalvezp at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116410
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105483
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.5|15.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105483
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Simon Martin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02dff52c60e5b89d290147f142f655c7817154c2
commit r15-3232-g02dff52c60e5b89d290147f142f655c7817154c2
Author: Simon Martin
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen ---
> Do you have the dump file from tree-vect?
Already attached.
> I guess it just doesn't vectorize something here.
>
> The right fix is probably to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #12 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #11)
I tried a simpler variation of your patch that aims at a more coherent
error message:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.cc b/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.cc
inde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116500
--- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen ---
Do you have the dump file from tree-vect?
I guess it just doesn't vectorize something here.
The right fix is probably to skip it for sparc, or adjust the vect_int target
test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
--- Comment #2 from Dan Klishch ---
Can confirm that the patch fixes both the minified reproducer from the bug
report and also the original reproducer (TestAsyncTestStreams from SerenityOS).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #21 from Andi Kleen ---
As HJ pointed out the change is not needed, the compiler DTRT with
no_callee_saved_registers on the callees.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #20 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 05:12:41PM +, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
>
> --- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
> (In reply to andi from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116410
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116488
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116410
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 59016
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59016&action=edit
A patch
Please try this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to andi from comment #18)
> > > -mgeneral-regs-only works for this case, but breaks SSE.
> >
> > Why is __attribute__((no_caller_saved_registers)) needed on start?
>
> To maintain the standard ABI to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #18 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
> > -mgeneral-regs-only works for this case, but breaks SSE.
>
> Why is __attribute__((no_caller_saved_registers)) needed on start?
To maintain the standard ABI to its caller. Otherwise the fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112456
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115612
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116505
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115612
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115905
Artyom Kolpakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/cplusplu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116505
Bug ID: 116505
Summary: ICE: in gen_reg_rtx, at emit-rtl.cc:1177 with -O
-fprofile-arcs -fprofile-values
-flate-combine-instructions on powerpc64le with basic
code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110522
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105497
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||valentyn.pavliuchenko@gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110881
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Miles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #16)
> Created attachment 59013 [details]
> test case
>
> This test case using Pinski's clobber trick shows the benefit.
>
> If you compile with -O2 -mgeneral-regs-only the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems simpler and cleaner:
--- a/gcc/cp/init.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/init.cc
@@ -5244,6 +5244,10 @@ build_delete (location_t loc, tree otype, tree addr,
tree dtor = CLASSTYPE_DESTRUCTOR (type);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116208
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simartin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116504
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 59015
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59015&action=edit
another reduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116504
Bug ID: 116504
Summary: wrong code with -mcpu=sifive-x280
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] |[15 Regression]
|-Wun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87614
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We have a concept of "inlining locations" in the compiler, and we only consider
a warning location to be in a system header if all call sites along the
inlining stack are in system headers. It seems that co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #16 from Andi Kleen ---
Created attachment 59013
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59013&action=edit
test case
This test case using Pinski's clobber trick shows the benefit.
If you compile with -O2 -mgeneral-regs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116503
Bug ID: 116503
Summary: wrong code with -O -fnon-call-exceptions
-finstrument-functions -floop-nest-optimize
-fno-tree-scev-cprop
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Bug ID: 116502
Summary: [15 Regression] -Wunused-result warning is not
supressed if coroutine awaiter returns a reference
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116499
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note BMI is used as a x86_64 target instruction set; Bit manipulation
instruction set .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to andi from comment #13)
> > --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
> > Please provide a small testcase to show the issue.
>
> You mean a test case for no_caller_saved_registers failing with SSE?
No. We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69600
--- Comment #7 from sshannin at gmail dot com ---
Comment on attachment 37541
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37541
preprocessed source
> #include
> #include
> #include
>typedef std::unique_ptr inner_value_t;
>typedef std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116501
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to andi from comment #13)
> Or a test case for the intended register allocation benefits?
> That's more complicated and won't be small.
So what if it won't be small but it will be understanding t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116501
Bug ID: 116501
Summary: wrong code with __builtin_sub_overflow_p() and
_BitInt() at -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #13 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
> --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
> Please provide a small testcase to show the issue.
You mean a test case for no_caller_saved_registers failing with SSE?
It's just
__attribute__((no_call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497
--- Comment #12 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
> no_call{er,ee}_saved_registers are i386-specific so how do we handle other
> ports? Are we going to require implementing them for all ports?
It's an optimization, so nothing is required. But
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116174
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d6bb1e257fc414d21bc31faa7ddecbc93a197e3c
commit r15-3222-gd6bb1e257fc414d21bc31faa7ddecbc93a197e3c
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Aug 27 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
Bug 113939 depends on bug 116429, which changed state.
Bug 116429 Summary: [LRA] [M86k] Wrong spill offset
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116429
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
Bug 113939 depends on bug 116374, which changed state.
Bug 116374 Summary: [LRA] [M68K] Wrong %argptr elimination
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116429
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116494
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes. It's a false positive warning about unreachable dead code. We have dozens
of these warnings for -Wrestrict, -Wstringop-overflow, and related warnings.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Matz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:542773888190ef67dca194f4861abab104fa9b5b
commit r15-3220-g542773888190ef67dca194f4861abab104fa9b5b
Author: Michael Matz
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116429
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Matz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e223ac9c225352e3aeea7180a3b56a96ecdbe2fd
commit r15-3221-ge223ac9c225352e3aeea7180a3b56a96ecdbe2fd
Author: Michael Matz
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116413
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Matz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:359209bdc7245f8768b5044acded8509545e4990
commit r15-3219-g359209bdc7245f8768b5044acded8509545e4990
Author: Michael Matz
Date: Th
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
