[Bug ipa/119852] New: The output of -fdump-ipa-clones can contain "(null)" as the suffix/reason for cloning

2025-04-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119852 Bug ID: 119852 Summary: The output of -fdump-ipa-clones can contain "(null)" as the suffix/reason for cloning Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Se

[Bug tree-optimization/119614] [15 regression] protobuf-29.4 fails to build with -O2 (error: cannot tail-call: call and return value are different)

2025-04-16 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug ipa/119803] [15 regression] ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu: in verify_mask, at value-range.cc:2484 since r15-9427

2025-04-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119803 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/119614] [15 regression] protobuf-29.4 fails to build with -O2 (error: cannot tail-call: call and return value are different)

2025-04-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614 --- Comment #33 from Martin Jambor --- The patch from comment #32 passes LTO-bootstrap and profiled-LTO-bootstrap on x86_64-linux. I have asked Honza to look at it and comment, especially on the decision to put the return VR into clone_info des

[Bug ipa/119803] [15 regression] ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu: in verify_mask, at value-range.cc:2484 since r15-9427

2025-04-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119803 --- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor --- I have posted a patch with the change proposed by Jakub to the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri67c3lbm7q@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug tree-optimization/119614] [15 regression] protobuf-29.4 fails to build with -O2 (error: cannot tail-call: call and return value are different)

2025-04-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614 --- Comment #32 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 61119 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61119&action=edit Fixed WIP patch Right, I forgot to modify output_cgraph_opt_summary_p as well, which was not necessary for th

[Bug ipa/119803] [15 regression] ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu: in verify_mask, at value-range.cc:2484 since r15-9427

2025-04-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119803 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/119614] [15 regression] protobuf-29.4 fails to build with -O2 (error: cannot tail-call: call and return value are different)

2025-04-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614 --- Comment #27 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 61116 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61116&action=edit WIP and only mildly tested patch This is my current WIP patch, so far only mildly tested, but which fixes the

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-04-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/119298] [15 Regression] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5 since r15-3441-g4292297a0f938f

2025-04-08 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/118924] [12/13/14 regression] Wrong code at -O2 and above leading to uninitialized accesses on aarch64-linux-gnu since r10-917-g3b47da42de621c

2025-04-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[12/13/14/15 regression]|[12/13/14 regression] Wrong

[Bug tree-optimization/119614] [15 regression] protobuf-29.4 fails to build with -O2 (error: cannot tail-call: call and return value are different)

2025-04-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119614 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-04-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #6) > Maybe add the PR119530 testcase as well? It is structurally similar, but it > lacks vectors so may be more useful food for the fuzzers. I have that on my TODO list,

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-04-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- ...and that one consists of the first and second patch in the series at https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/cover.1743458148.git.jamb...@gcc.gnu.org/T/#t

[Bug ipa/116572] [14/15 Regression] Using a std::string passed to a virtual member function of a side-casted pointer spuriously ICEs (wrong code with checking disable)

2025-04-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116572 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/119530] [15 regression] wrong code at -O{s,2,3} with "-fno-tree-vrp -fno-inline" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119530 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 60939 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60939&action=edit Simple fix This patch is a simple fix. I'll submit one streaming the necessary type to the mailing list thoug

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch --- Comm

[Bug tree-optimization/118924] [12/13/14/15 regression] Wrong code at -O2 and above leading to uninitialized accesses on aarch64-linux-gnu since r10-917-g3b47da42de621c

2025-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924 --- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6ldslmk3y@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug tree-optimization/119493] [12/13/14/15 Regression] missing tail call to self with struct in some cases

2025-03-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119493 --- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12) > For musttail, perhaps SRA could avoid changing the path from musttail call > return to the return stmt. > I've tried > --- gcc/tree-sra.cc.jj2025-01-02

[Bug ipa/119318] [15 Regression] wrong code with vector arithmetics at -O2 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-03-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119318 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/119298] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 60759 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60759&action=edit Output of -fopt-info-vec in the slow case Output of -fopt-info-vec in the slow case

[Bug target/119298] New: 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 Bug ID: 119298 Summary: 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5 Product: gcc Version: 15.0

[Bug target/119298] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 60760 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60760&action=edit Output of -fopt-info-vec in the fast case Output of -fopt-info-vec in the fast case

[Bug target/119298] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 --- Comment #1 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 60757 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60757&action=edit Perf annotate of the slow case Perf annotate of the slow case

[Bug target/119298] 538.imagick_r is faster when compiled with GCC 14.2 and -Ofast -flto -march=native than with master on Zen5

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119298 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 60758 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60758&action=edit Perf annotate of the fast case Perf annotate of the fast case

[Bug ipa/116572] [14/15 Regression] Using a std::string passed to a virtual member function of a side-casted pointer spuriously ICEs (wrong code with checking disable)

2025-03-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116572 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug ipa/118243] [13/14/15 Regression] Incorrect behaviour of complex types with -O3 since r13-5681-ge8109bd87766be

2025-03-11 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118243 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/118924] [12/13/14/15 regression] Wrong code at -O2 and above leading to uninitialized accesses on aarch64-linux-gnu since r10-917-g3b47da42de621c

2025-03-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924 --- Comment #17 from Martin Jambor --- After reading from ao_compare::compare_ao_refs, I tend to think the correct predicate for "tbaa_hazard" from my comment #14 is types_equal_for_same_type_for_tbaa_p (with the last argument true in early SRA

[Bug ipa/118318] [15 regression] ICE when building firefox-134.0 with PGO

2025-03-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/45375] [meta-bug] Issues with building Mozilla (i.e. Firefox) with LTO

2025-03-07 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45375 Bug 45375 depends on bug 118318, which changed state. Bug 118318 Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building firefox-134.0 with PGO https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/118924] [12/13/14/15 regression] Wrong code at -O2 and above leading to uninitialized accesses on aarch64-linux-gnu since r10-917-g3b47da42de621c

2025-03-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924 --- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor --- So something like the following - which is completely untested, the type test may be a wrong one, I'd like to think this through a little more before actually proposing this, but any comments still welcome:

[Bug c++/118924] [12/13/14/15 regression] Wrong code at -O2 and above leading to uninitialized accesses on aarch64-linux-gnu since r10-917-g3b47da42de621c

2025-03-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ipa/118785] [15 Regression] ICE when building vpl-gpu-rt (during IPA pass, ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:1049)

2025-03-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/118318] [15 regression] ICE when building firefox-134.0 with PGO

2025-03-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318 --- Comment #18 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed the patch on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6bjui45il@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug ipa/118318] [15 regression] ICE when building firefox-134.0 with PGO

2025-02-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/119069] New: 519.lbm_r runs 60% slower with -Ofast -flto -march=znver5 on an AMD Zen5 machine than when compiled with GCC 14 (or with -march=znver4)

2025-02-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119069 Bug ID: 119069 Summary: 519.lbm_r runs 60% slower with -Ofast -flto -march=znver5 on an AMD Zen5 machine than when compiled with GCC 14 (or with -march=znver4) Product: gcc

[Bug ipa/118318] [15 regression] ICE when building firefox-134.0 with PGO

2025-02-26 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118318 --- Comment #16 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #13) > [...] > > Here are two calls to + and it is not clear which one triggers the ICE. > However sum += e->count.ipa (); quite obviously preserves the fact that sum

[Bug ipa/118785] [15 Regression] ICE when building vpl-gpu-rt (during IPA pass, ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:1049)

2025-02-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785 --- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6tt8i58kq@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug tree-optimization/86270] [12/13/14 Regression] Simple loop needs an extra register and an extra instruction

2025-02-25 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86270 --- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor --- We no longer track Zen1 performence, but this hasbrought about a dramatic improvement of 465.tonto on our SomeKindOfLake machine: https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=464.230.0 Thanks!

[Bug middle-end/26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k17, 2k and 2k6 and 95)

2025-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163 Bug 26163 depends on bug 118125, which changed state. Bug 118125 Summary: [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 What|Remove

[Bug lto/118858] Missing builtin attributes handling for DEF_ATTR_IDENT with LTO

2025-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118858 Bug 118858 depends on bug 118125, which changed state. Bug 118125 Summary: [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 What|Remo

[Bug lto/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-02-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/118862] New: UBSAN: shift exponent too large since r15-7345-gc2a0ee58865c5a

2025-02-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862 Bug ID: 118862 Summary: UBSAN: shift exponent too large since r15-7345-gc2a0ee58865c5a Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug lto/118858] Missing builtin attributes handling for DEF_ATTR_IDENT with LTO

2025-02-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118858 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- The reason why I only added cold was not a question of streaming (I don't think we avoid any this way) but rather me being lazy, in the sense that I really wanted the cold attribute to go in reasonably quick

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-02-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED See Also|

[Bug tree-optimization/118852] New: Train run of 502.gcc_r compiled with -Ofast -fprofile-generate -march=x86_64-v3 fails

2025-02-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118852 Bug ID: 118852 Summary: Train run of 502.gcc_r compiled with -Ofast -fprofile-generate -march=x86_64-v3 fails Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Se

[Bug ipa/118785] [15 Regression] ICE when building vpl-gpu-rt (during IPA pass, ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:1049)

2025-02-12 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug lto/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-02-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #14 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6a5atcvem@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug ipa/118243] [13/14/15 Regression] Incorrect behaviour of complex types with -O3 since r13-5681-ge8109bd87766be

2025-02-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118243 --- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a patch on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6cyfpcviz@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug ipa/118243] [13/14/15 Regression] Incorrect behaviour of complex types with -O3 since r13-5681-ge8109bd87766be

2025-02-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118243 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9) > Indeed we don't seem to split a vector in the same way: > We do but the constant IPA-CP is different, is it is the entire vector in one constant, as opposed

[Bug ipa/118785] [15 Regression] ICE when building vpl-gpu-rt (during IPA pass, ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:1049)

2025-02-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118785 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- Could be, I am about to re-test and commit a patch for PR 118097 which was approved on Friday and which addresses use of wrong types for IPA-CP calculation (the patch alone does not fix this ICE, though).

[Bug ipa/118243] [13/14/15 Regression] Incorrect behaviour of complex types with -O3 since r13-5681-ge8109bd87766be

2025-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118243 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ipa/118243] [13/14/15 Regression] Incorrect behaviour of complex types with -O3 since r13-5681-ge8109bd87766be

2025-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118243 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- This is an equivalent testcase without OpenMP and especially without iostream, making dump reading a bit easier: using complex_t = double __complex__; struct A { complex_t value; A(double r) : valu

[Bug go/118746] New: In go FE, __builtin_unreachable does not have the attribute cold - or any attribute, for that matter

2025-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118746 Bug ID: 118746 Summary: In go FE, __builtin_unreachable does not have the attribute cold - or any attribute, for that matter Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRM

[Bug middle-end/118745] New: UBSAN: member access within null pointer of type 'struct gfc_omp_namelist' since r15-7285-gbea86e82146b9b

2025-02-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118745 Bug ID: 118745 Summary: UBSAN: member access within null pointer of type 'struct gfc_omp_namelist' since r15-7285-gbea86e82146b9b Product: gcc Version: 15.0

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor --- The cold attribute is simply and silently dropped on the floor by decl_attributes (in attribs.cc) in the process of building decls for builtins because it cannot look it up in the gnu attribute name space b

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor --- For some reason, unlikely_executed_stmt_p (and thus unlikely_executed_bb_p) do not see that __builtin_unreachable is a cold function: (gdb) pt decl > QI size unit-size al

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- The issue can also be reproduced with applying: diff --git a/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.cc b/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.cc index 33f19365ec3..4c062fe8a0e 100644 --- a/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.cc +++ b/gcc/ipa-fnsummary.cc @@ -255,

[Bug fortran/118683] UBSAN: Invalid value for type ar_type since r15-7070-g0d1e62b83561ba

2025-01-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118683 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug other/63426] [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined

2025-01-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426 Bug 63426 depends on bug 118683, which changed state. Bug 118683 Summary: UBSAN: Invalid value for type ar_type since r15-7070-g0d1e62b83561ba https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118683 What|Removed |A

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor --- Passing -fdisable-tree-rebuild_frequencies1 to the LTO linking step brings back the original performance.

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- I guess I should have started with looking at annotated assembly. The hot loop in the hot functions changes from: 53 : ,-> 5534e0: lea(%r11,%rax,1),%rsi 659 : | 5534e4: mov(%rsi),%edi 48

[Bug tree-optimization/117892] [15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: in single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:332 since r15-5336-gcee7d080d5c2a5

2025-01-29 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117892 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #4) > [...] Unfortunately when I > then looked at SLP vectorization when all IPA-VR propagations were > allowed again, this particular case was not there (but there we

[Bug fortran/118683] New: UBSAN: Invalid value for type ar_type since r15-7070-g0d1e62b83561ba

2025-01-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118683 Bug ID: 118683 Summary: UBSAN: Invalid value for type ar_type since r15-7070-g0d1e62b83561ba Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/117892] [15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: in single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:332 since r15-5336-gcee7d080d5c2a5

2025-01-27 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117892 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a patch to address this on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6zfjce03l@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug tree-optimization/117892] [15 Regression] ICE on valid code at -O1 and above on x86_64-linux-gnu: in single_succ_edge, at basic-block.h:332 since r15-5336-gcee7d080d5c2a5

2025-01-27 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117892 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|ipa |tree-optimization Assignee|hu

[Bug ipa/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-24 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- Redirecting the call to operator delete[](void*) to __builtin_unreachable(), which seems the correct thing to do, leads to one more SLP vectorization in the functin experiencing the slow-down, comparing -fop

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 --- Comment #33 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a patch on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6frlax0fz@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug ipa/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- Unfortunately I have lost access to the machine where I was debugging this due to some networking issue. Just before that I have discovered that an extra SLP vectorization in the slow version of the hottest

[Bug ipa/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 --- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor --- On top if r15-7055-g459816efa13d9d I added a patch adding a dbg_counter to limit the updates. The slow-down is caused by two updates of value ranges in jump function, both of which are necessary to get the

[Bug ipa/118535] [15 regression] wrong code at -O{2,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294

2025-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118535 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhendong.su at inf dot ethz.ch --- Comm

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 --- Comment #31 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #30) > FWIW, I haven't hit this in the wild at all, so it's not pressing for me at > least even if ofc it should be fixed before release. It certainly has to be fixed, I

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-15 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug ipa/118125] [15 Regression] 7-16% slowdown of 510.parest_r on x86-64(-v3) since r15-6110-g92e0e0f8177530

2025-01-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118125 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ipa/118138] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O3 with "-fno-inline" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-10 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118138 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug ipa/118138] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O3 with "-fno-inline" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118138 --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6y0zq5oni@virgil.suse.cz/T/#u

[Bug ipa/118138] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O3 with "-fno-inline" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2025-01-03 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118138 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/118059] [15 Regression] ubsan instrumented gcc: valid value for type 'expr_t' in gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc

2025-01-02 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118059 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- Indeed, our UBSAN testsuite results are green again, thanks for the fix!

[Bug ipa/118097] [15 regression] recent bug with -O2, but not -O1 since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2024-12-20 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118097 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug ipa/118138] [15 Regression] wrong code at -O3 with "-fno-inline" on x86_64-linux-gnu since r15-6294-g96fb71883d438b

2024-12-20 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118138 --- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor --- I'll have a look, though I may not be able to do so in December.

[Bug ipa/110378] IPA-SRA for destructors

2024-12-20 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110378 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- IIUC only the simplest testcase of the three was fixed. I'll try to re-check soon-ish.

[Bug ipa/118085] New: We use flag_delete_null_pointer_checks even when there is no current cfun

2024-12-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118085 Bug ID: 118085 Summary: We use flag_delete_null_pointer_checks even when there is no current cfun Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug fortran/118059] [15 Regression] ubsan instrumented gcc: valid value for type 'expr_t' in gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc

2024-12-17 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118059 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-12-17 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug rtl-optimization/117360] [15 regression] ext-dce.cc:573:15: runtime error: shift exponent 127 is too large for 64-bit type 'long long unsigned int'

2024-12-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117360 --- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor --- I can confirm that our UBSAN bootstrap+testsuite buildbot run passed all tests and is nicely green again. Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/117142] [13/14/15 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: error: returns_twice call is not first in basic block 2 at -O1 and above since r13-1754-g7a158a5776f5ca

2024-11-28 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117142 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/117764] [15 Regression] cddce should handle __builtin_unreachable guards

2024-11-24 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117764 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/117442] [15 Regression] Cannot build libgfortran with enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats after r15-4760-g0b73e9382ab51c

2024-11-06 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117442 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3) > Sorry about the regression. Should be fixed by the above patch. No worries, thanks for a quick fix!

[Bug other/117442] New: Cannot build libgfortran with enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats after r15-4760-g0b73e9382ab51c

2024-11-04 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117442 Bug ID: 117442 Summary: Cannot build libgfortran with enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats after r15-4760-g0b73e9382ab51c Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Stat

[Bug other/117409] New: ASAN issues compiling gfortran.dg/diagnostic-format-sarif-pr105916.f90

2024-11-01 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117409 Bug ID: 117409 Summary: ASAN issues compiling gfortran.dg/diagnostic-format-sarif-pr105916.f90 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/117360] [15 regression] ext-dce.cc:573:15: runtime error: shift exponent 127 is too large for 64-bit type 'long long unsigned int'

2024-10-31 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117360 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3) > What's interesting is I did a bootstrap with ubsan a while back to chase > down this stuff. Could be something recently introduced or a path we didn't > trigge

[Bug ipa/115815] [13 Regression] ICE: in purge_all_uses, at ipa-param-manipulation.cc:632 with -O2 -flto and incorrect usage of attribute destructor

2024-10-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115815 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/117142] [13/14/15 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: error: returns_twice call is not first in basic block 2 at -O1 and above since r13-1754-g7a158a5776f5ca

2024-10-22 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117142 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug gcov-profile/117211] [15 regression] Building gcc configured with --enable-coverage=opt fails with a link error after r15-4286-gc397a8c12296b7

2024-10-21 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117211 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED See Also|

[Bug gcov-profile/117211] New: Building gcc configured with --enable-coverage=opt fails with a link error after r15-4286-gc397a8c12296b7

2024-10-18 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117211 Bug ID: 117211 Summary: Building gcc configured with --enable-coverage=opt fails with a link error after r15-4286-gc397a8c12296b7 Product: gcc Version: 15.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug ipa/115815] [13/14 Regression] ICE: in purge_all_uses, at ipa-param-manipulation.cc:632 with -O2 -flto and incorrect usage of attribute destructor

2024-10-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115815 --- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor --- Right, sorry, life intervened. But I am aware of the need to backport. However, there is a problem with the testcase that should be addressed first: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ri6v7xud7pu

[Bug ipa/114985] [15 regression] internal compiler error: in discriminator_fail during stage2

2024-10-14 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114985 --- Comment #35 from Martin Jambor --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #34) > This is fixed, right? Well, yes, but as part of this I promised to go over all VR bits in ipa-cp.* and ipa-prop.* which is still only half done. But I do ha

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >