https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116140
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118217
Bug ID: 118217
Summary: Dot-product for square on difference of two small type
integers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118215
Bug ID: 118215
Summary: Miss runtime alias check for vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118213
Bug ID: 118213
Summary: IVOPT causes superfluous IVs
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118028
Bug ID: 118028
Summary: A better vectorized reduction across multi-level
loop-nest
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117738
Bug ID: 117738
Summary: Failure to recognize dot-product pattern in inner loop
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117607
Bug ID: 117607
Summary: unnecessary scev optimization for popcnt
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117282
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> >could we introduce a new option like -mcmodel-dyn{=tiny/small/large} as a
> >supplement to -mcmode
>
> This would cause too many confusion really. especially depen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117282
Bug ID: 117282
Summary: Miss optimization to eliminate strlen computation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116855
--- Comment #5 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #4)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > I would suggest to add a STMT_VINFO_ENSURE_NOTRAP or so and delay actual
> > verification to vectorizable_load when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116855
Bug ID: 116855
Summary: Unsafe early-break vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116825
Bug ID: 116825
Summary: aarch64: unnecessary vector perm combination
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116684
--- Comment #4 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Since the reduction opportunity is in the unrolled scalar inner loop we'd
> have
> to know how DOT_PROD combines lanes which we do not specify but instead
> expect t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115060
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115228
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115707
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Confirmed.
This is known to be another new bug, and has been recorded in PR115060.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114814
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
The pattern to match the code belongs to a generic dot-product category, we
could consider mapping it to native dot-product instruction with a constant "1"
operand.
moviv29.16b, 0x1
.L4:
ldr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115060
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
Linaro reported a regression:
https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1226
Actually, this is not, but exposes a new bug in
vect_look_through_possible_promotion. The function fails to figure out root
definition i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115228
Bug ID: 115228
Summary: Suspicious code in tree-vect-data-refs.cc
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115060
Bug ID: 115060
Summary: Probable an issue around usage of
vect_look_through_possible_promotion in
tree-vect-patterns.cc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114769
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
When half_type is null, and call chain would be:
vect_supportable_direct_optab_p (vinfo, sum_type, SAD_EXPR, NULL, ...)
-> get_vectype_for_scalar_type (vinfo, NULL)
-> get_related_vectype_for_scalar_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114769
Bug ID: 114769
Summary: Suspicious code in vect_recog_sad_pattern()
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114440
Bug ID: 114440
Summary: Fail to recognize a chain of lane-reduced operations
for loop reduction vect
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
--- Comment #7 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > One more thing:
> > ```
> > vect_shift_0 = vect_value >> { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
> > vect_shift_1 = vect_value >> { 4, 5, 6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Note on aarch64 with SVE, you should be able to generate those constants
> without a load, using the index instruction.
Ok. Thanks for the note. This still requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
Bug ID: 113326
Summary: Optimize vector shift with constant delta on
shifting-count operand
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113104
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
--- Comment #8 from Feng Xue ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-December/641547.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
--- Comment #7 from Feng Xue ---
> The issue here is that because the "outer" pattern consumes
> patt_64 = (int) patt_63 it should have adjusted _2 = (int) _1
> stmt-to-vectorize
> as being the outer pattern root stmt for all this logic to work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
--- Comment #6 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #5)
> > The issue here is that because the "outer" pattern consumes
> > patt_64 = (int) patt_63 it should have adjusted _2 = (int) _1
> > stmt-to-vectorize
> > as bein
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113104
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> See my proposal on the mailing list to lift the restriction of sticking to a
> single vector size, I think this is another example showing this. If you
> use BB lev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113104
Bug ID: 113104
Summary: Suboptimal loop-based slp node splicing across
iterations
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
The function vect_bb_vectorization_profitable_p resorts to a recursive way to
identify scalar use, for this case, setting STMT_VINFO_LIVE_P or not would not
change scalar cost computation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> It's the logic
>
> FOR_EACH_VEC_ELT (SLP_TREE_SCALAR_STMTS (node), i, stmt_info)
> {
> if (svisited.contains (stmt_info))
> continue;
> st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113091
Bug ID: 113091
Summary: Over-estimate SLP vector-to-scalar cost for non-live
pattern statement
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106671
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109427
Bug ID: 109427
Summary: Wrong param description in param.opt
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108445
--- Comment #1 from Feng Xue ---
Created attachment 54297
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54297&action=edit
testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108445
Bug ID: 108445
Summary: Address expression on global variable is not
normalized
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108117
--- Comment #8 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to Feng Xue from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > > https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/program/setjmp
> >
> > I think that most
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108117
--- Comment #6 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/program/setjmp
I think that most programmers are not aware of this, neither I for sure. Usage
of volatile here is not that intuitive
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108117
Bug ID: 108117
Summary: Wrong instruction scheduling on value coming from
abnormal SSA
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107828
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107829
Bug ID: 107829
Summary: Trivial compile time tracking code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107828
Bug ID: 107828
Summary: tree-inlining would generate SSA with incorrect def
stmt
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107818
Bug ID: 107818
Summary: Overflow of linemap breaks its chronological order
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107670
Bug ID: 107670
Summary: Suspicious redundant code in ipa-cp
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107066
--- Comment #3 from Feng Xue ---
Got it. Thanks for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107066
Bug ID: 107066
Summary: Field initialized before ctor is mis-optimized away by
DSE
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513
--- Comment #10 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #8)
> I am about to thest the following patch. In longer-run, it would be better
> to never generate lattice values outside of the value_range but there is an
> ordering
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104377
--- Comment #4 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #2)
> (In reply to Feng Xue from comment #1)
> >
> > OK. I does missed something. Here we could not hold assumption that
> > ipcp_decision_stage() only sees raw cgraph nod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102513
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104377
--- Comment #1 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Feng Xue from comment #0)
> For function create_specialized_node(), the "node" to operated on seems
> always to be an original cgraph node, never a clone node. From call graph
> related to the functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104377
Bug ID: 104377
Summary: Unreachable code in create_specialized_node of
ipa-prop.c?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103786
Bug ID: 103786
Summary: Suspicious code in verify_type
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100802
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
--- Comment #4 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3)
> Simply initializing the variable as in the patch below avoids the warning.
> The control flow in the code is sufficiently opaque to make it worthwhile
> from a readab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102681
Bug ID: 102681
Summary: AArch64 bootstrap failure
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102451
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102400
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102451
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Confirmed. Mind fixing it by recording the basic-block index before
> removing/replacing?
OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102451
Bug ID: 102451
Summary: Suspicious null-pointer dereference in
delete_dead_or_redundant_call
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102400
Bug ID: 102400
Summary: Field might miss initialization in
vn_reference_insert_pieces()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102214
Bug ID: 102214
Summary: ICE when compiling local class with -fno-weak
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101502
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> @Honza: Can you please take a look?
> @Feng: Do you have a test-case for it, please?
No. I just got this from code logic, but not 100% sure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101502
Bug ID: 101502
Summary: Inconsistent behavior in maybe_record_node()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100802
Bug ID: 100802
Summary: VRP fails to fold comparison with known value orders
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100580
Bug ID: 100580
Summary: ICE with -fdump-passes
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100222
Bug ID: 100222
Summary: Redundant mark_irreducible_loops () in predicate.c
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99951
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
Can we report error in verify_ssa() when a non-default SSA's defining statement
has NULL bb, which is always a case that the statement is removed somewhere?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99951
Bug ID: 99951
Summary: Dead return value after modify_call() is not released
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98815
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
If we step into free_dominance_info(dir), it is a wrapper of
free_dominance_info (cfun, dir), which means it assumes a non-NULL "cfun".
Additionally, please go through calling stack of free_dominance_info():
f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98815
Bug ID: 98815
Summary: Redundant free_dominance_info in
cgraph_node::analyze()
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98782
Feng Xue changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxue at os dot
amperecomputing.com
--- Comme
75 matches
Mail list logo
