[Bug c/100854] TS 18661-3 and backwards-incompatible setting of __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100854 --- Comment #6 from Andrea Corallo --- "jasonwucj at gcc dot gnu.org" writes: [...] > > I guess this issue has been resolved by newlib implementation. :) > > Refer to the discussions on: > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/2021/018471.h

[Bug jit/99126] Compilation ICE trying insert trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99126 --- Comment #9 from Andrea Corallo --- "dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99126 > > --- Comment #8 from David Malcolm --- > (In reply to CVS Commits from comment #6) >> The master

[Bug jit/99126] Compilation ICE trying insert trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99126 --- Comment #5 from Andrea Corallo --- "dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99126 > > David Malcolm changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug jit/99126] Compilation ICE trying insert trap

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99126 --- Comment #1 from Andrea Corallo --- This is the bt of how the C front-end is initializing these declarations: #0 set_builtin_decl (implicit_p=, decl=, fncode=) at ../../gcc/tree.h:5662 #1 def_builtin_1 (fncode=, name=, fntype

[Bug target/98931] [11 Regression] arm: Assembly fails with "branch out of range or not a multiple of 2" since r11-2012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98931 --- Comment #10 from Andrea Corallo --- Following suggestions I'm testing the attached emitting the following for long branches where LE cannot cover: subslr, #1 bmi .L2

[Bug target/98931] [11 Regression] arm: Assembly fails with "branch out of range or not a multiple of 2" since r11-2012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98931 --- Comment #9 from Andrea Corallo --- Right I'll rework the patch. Thanks

[Bug target/98931] [11 Regression] arm: Assembly fails with "branch out of range or not a multiple of 2" since r11-2012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98931 --- Comment #6 from Andrea Corallo --- I'm testing the attached fix.

[Bug target/98931] [11 Regression] arm: Assembly fails with "branch out of range or not a multiple of 2" since r11-2012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98931 --- Comment #4 from Andrea Corallo --- "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98931 > > --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- > And the problem is not something not being multiple of 2, b

[Bug target/96372] [11 regression] arm/ivopts.c fails since r11-2012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96372 --- Comment #2 from Andrea Corallo --- I see what's going on, originally this object-size text <= 20 test was gated with target 'arm_thumb2'. My patch to exclude LOB targets replaced that with 'arm_thumb2_ok_no_arm_v8_1_lob', unfortunatelly this

[Bug jit/98615] libgccjit crash while freeing 'clone_info' in 'cgraph_c_finalize'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98615 --- Comment #9 from Andrea Corallo --- "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98615 > > --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --- > (In reply to Andrea Corallo from comment #7) >> Thanks Mart

[Bug jit/98615] libgccjit crash while freeing 'clone_info' in 'cgraph_c_finalize'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98615 --- Comment #7 from Andrea Corallo --- Thanks Martin, I can confirm that also the bootstrap is back okay.

[Bug jit/98615] libgccjit crash while freeing 'clone_info' in 'cgraph_c_finalize'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98615 --- Comment #4 from Andrea Corallo --- Thank you for looking into it! I tried my self but with no success

[Bug rtl-optimization/97092] [10/11 Regression] aarch64, SVE: ICE in ira-color.c since r10-4752-g2d56600c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 --- Comment #10 from Andrea Corallo --- "acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 > > --- Comment #9 from Alex Coplan --- > Thanks for fixing this Andrea! FWIW I can reproduce the IC

[Bug rtl-optimization/97092] [10/11 Regression] aarch64, SVE: ICE in ira-color.c since r10-4752-g2d56600c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 --- Comment #7 from Andrea Corallo --- "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 > > --- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org > --- > (In reply to Andrea Corallo from commen

[Bug rtl-optimization/97092] [10/11 Regression] aarch64, SVE: ICE in ira-color.c since r10-4752-g2d56600c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 --- Comment #5 from Andrea Corallo --- "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 > > --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org > --- > (In reply to Andrea Corallo from commen

[Bug rtl-optimization/97092] [10/11 Regression] aarch64, SVE: ICE in ira-color.c since r10-4752-g2d56600c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 --- Comment #3 from Andrea Corallo --- What is going on is that in 'update_costs_from_allocno' we try to identify the smallest mode using narrower_subreg_mode to then update the costs. The two modes involved here are E_DImode and E_VNx2QImode, c

[Bug rtl-optimization/97092] [10/11 Regression] aarch64, SVE: ICE in ira-color.c since r10-4752-g2d56600c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 --- Comment #2 from Andrea Corallo --- "akrl at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97092 > > --- Comment #1 from akrl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > Hi all, > > I can't reproduce this on current maste

[Bug target/96968] aarch64 : ICE in vregs or expand pass, lowering __builtin_aarch64_get_{fpcr,fpsr,fpcr64,fpsr64}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96968 --- Comment #8 from Andrea Corallo --- "iains at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes: [...] > unfortunately, I've not been able to test since you applied this - currently > bootstrap is broken on aarch64-darwin for reasons outside our control (

[Bug target/96968] aarch64 : ICE in vregs or expand pass, lowering __builtin_aarch64_get_{fpcr,fpsr,fpcr64,fpsr64}

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96968 --- Comment #6 from Andrea Corallo --- I believe f5e73de00e9c853ce65333efada7409b0d00f758 should have fixed this. Okay to close? Thanks Andrea