[Bug tree-optimization/112307] Segmentation fault with -O1 -fcode-hoisting

2025-04-23 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307 --- Comment #15 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Thanks Jonathan for -x c++, it was just what GCC on my system needed

[Bug tree-optimization/112307] Segmentation fault with -O1 -fcode-hoisting

2025-04-23 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307 --- Comment #14 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61179 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61179&action=edit reduced.cpp I think this reduction is valid. Fails with -O1 -fcode-hoisting, doesn't fail

[Bug tree-optimization/112307] Segmentation fault with -O1 -fcode-hoisting

2025-04-21 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/118008] [14/15/16 regression] ICE when bootstrapping with Go on arm (gen_movdi, at config/arm/arm.md:6296)

2025-04-21 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118008 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/119592] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] false positive array bounds warning with set> since r12-1992-g6feb628a706e86

2025-04-21 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119592 --- Comment #6 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61165 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61165&action=edit reduced.cpp Thanks for the pointer Sam, here's the C-vise reduction.

[Bug rtl-optimization/116479] [15/16 Regression] wrong code with -O -funroll-loops -finline-stringops -fmodulo-sched --param=max-iterations-computation-cost=637924876 on aarch64

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116479 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug c/119877] New: [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] Honor __attribute__((unused)) and don't issue a warning -Wunused-function

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
15.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- When compiling: static __attribute__((unused)) int a(); int main() {} GCC 12+ fa

[Bug tree-optimization/119872] [15/16 regression] wrong code at -O{1,2,s}

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #61163|0 |1 is obsolete

[Bug tree-optimization/119872] [15/16 regression] wrong code at -O{1,2,s}

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872 --- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61163 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61163&action=edit cleaned up I cleaned up the testcase, without changing the arithmetic, so it passes with 14.2

[Bug tree-optimization/119872] [15/16 regression] wrong code at -O{1,2,s}

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119872 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/119592] [12/13/14/15/16 Regression] false positive array bounds warning with set>

2025-04-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119592 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15/16 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-19 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #34 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Thanks Andrew for the reply. In that case, the issue is probably invalid because checkpoint4.cpp also has several reinterpret_casts casting to things involving templates. Too bad, LLVM's -fsan

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15/16 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-19 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #32 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Oh no I'm so sorry all! I tried to set the previous attachment obsolete unfortunately it quoted all of it and posted here! Sorry for the tall thread

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15/16 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-19 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #31 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61160 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61160&action=edit minimized.cpp GCC -O1 -fstrict-aliasing or -O2 or -O3: aborts I've attached the min

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15/16 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-19 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #61145|0 |1 is obsolete

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-16 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #29 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- fails with even -O1 -fstrict-aliasing -fcode-hoisting

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-16 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #28 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61145 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61145&action=edit 27k bytes reduced testcase further reduced with c-reduce. verified with various LLVM fsanitize's

[Bug middle-end/110282] Segmentation fault with specific optimizations

2025-04-16 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282 --- Comment #14 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Minimized testcase: int a[], d[]; long b, c, e, g; int f, h, i; short j, k, l; int *m = a; static int *n(int *o) { int p = l == *o | k <= j; p = *d; h = c; g = 0 == e; f = *m; b

[Bug middle-end/110282] Segmentation fault with specific optimizations

2025-04-15 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282 --- Comment #12 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Thanks Sam, I'm restarting reduction this time checking if it compiles with trunk GCC as well

[Bug middle-end/110282] Segmentation fault with specific optimizations

2025-04-15 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282 --- Comment #10 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Bad commit: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=ff6686d2e5f797d6c6a36ad14a7084bc1dc350e4 Minimal testcase: int a[]; short b, c; long d; __attribute__((noipa)) long(e)() {} static int f

[Bug middle-end/110282] Segmentation fault with specific optimizations

2025-04-15 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282 --- Comment #9 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Sorry never mind I understand, it should still be bisected and reduced so that any hidden bugs would be uncovered. I'll bisect it

[Bug middle-end/110282] Segmentation fault with specific optimizations

2025-04-15 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110282 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug other/105404] Update in-tree copy of zlib to zlib-1.3.1

2025-04-14 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105404 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/119778] [13/14/15 regression] -Wuninitialized crashed with longjmp/setjmp

2025-04-13 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119778 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/119683] [13/14/15 Regression] recalculating the return value which was already in the register right before function return

2025-04-13 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119683 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-12 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 --- Comment #27 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- *sorry I meant 60k bytes not lines

[Bug ipa/115767] [12/13/14/15 regression] GCC loses track of value on aarch64 with -O2 since r11-3308-gd119f34c952f87

2025-04-12 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115767 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug bootstrap/119729] configure should issue a warning about building in the src tree

2025-04-12 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119729 --- Comment #6 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- I haven't been given a sourceware account, I can't file a bug on sourceware. Maybe we can do it for GCC only and if they agree with it in the future they can change it: Updated patch:

[Bug bootstrap/119729] configure should issue a warning about building in the src tree

2025-04-12 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119729 --- Comment #4 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Suggested patch: +if test $srcdir = . ; then + AC_MSG_ERROR([building in the top level project directory is not supported. Please change the current directory to a new directory (can be a new

[Bug bootstrap/119729] configure should issue a warning about building in the src tree

2025-04-11 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119729 --- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- > If it is refusing ./configure, why not. When doing ./configure a very ugly bug today in `configure` didn't allow me to compile, we can just forbid this. So if you agree I'll edit t

[Bug other/119729] New: GCC does not issue a warning for in-tree building

2025-04-11 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
Component: other Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- it would save time for contributors if GCC could detect that you're building inside the directory and ask you to cd to a different directory and build there and ref

[Bug tree-optimization/119706] [15 regression] ICE in gimple pass 'dom' for -O3 -mcpu=grace --param=aarch64-autovec-preference=sve-only

2025-04-10 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706 --- Comment #4 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Created attachment 61059 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61059&action=edit This is a reduced testcase, but modified in a way that it gives an error in VRP stage instead

[Bug tree-optimization/119706] [15 regression] ICE in gimple pass 'dom' for -O3 -mcpu=grace --param=aarch64-autovec-preference=sve-only

2025-04-10 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119706 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/86136] Modular multiplication optimization

2025-04-09 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86136 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug target/119626] On aarch64, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-08 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 --- Comment #7 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Today Microsoft Copilot wrongly quoted what I earlier said (bots are reading these threads), so I need to fix my mistake for anyone reading this thread: If you want to allow the compiler to use the

[Bug target/119678] New: FreeBSD RISC-V broken due to single-char typo in macro FBSD_LINK_PG_NOTES

2025-04-08 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/pull/108 has found out that the commit https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit

[Bug target/119663] Can't build GCC on aarch64-apple-darwin24.3.0

2025-04-07 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119663 --- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- *typo: configure does succeed, it is from `make` that: *** Configuration aarch64-apple-darwin24.4.0 not supported

[Bug target/119663] Can't build GCC on aarch64-apple-darwin24.3.0

2025-04-07 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119663 --- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Right, latest macOS 15.4 which is darwin24.4.0 neither works

[Bug bootstrap/119663] Can't build GCC on aarch64-apple-darwin24.3.0

2025-04-07 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119663 --- Comment #1 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- version: trunk

[Bug bootstrap/119663] New: Can't build GCC on aarch64-apple-darwin24.3.0

2025-04-07 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
onent: bootstrap Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- On macos 15.3.1 (I'll make another comment down if 15.4 is no different), where uname -r says 24.3.0 configure says: *** Configuration aarch64-apple-darwin

[Bug target/119626] On aarch64, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-06 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 --- Comment #6 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Lastly I would like to mention why this is such an important issue in the use __bf16 and why __bf16 is otherwise very inefficient: bfcvt is not only used for casts. Consider the following code

[Bug target/119626] On aarch64, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-06 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 --- Comment #5 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Sorry for another ping. I did some more research and to make it easier for you to confirm this issue, we can confirm the expected behavior with clang: Clang behavior -march=armv9-a+bf16 -O3: void

[Bug target/119626] On ARM, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 --- Comment #3 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Sorry for so many pings, the final code is: void convert1(int * __restrict a, __bf16 * __restrict x) { x[0] = (__bf16)a[0]; x[1] = (__bf16)a[1]; x[2] = (__bf16)a[2]; x[3] = (__bf16)a

[Bug target/119626] On ARM, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug target/119626] On ARM, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID

[Bug target/119626] On ARM, use the bfcvt instruction to cast to __bf16 when target supports it

2025-04-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119626 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |--- Status|RESOLVED

[Bug target/119626] New: Use bfcvt arm instruction to cast to __bf16 when ARM target supports it

2025-04-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- __bf16 convert1(int a) { return (__bf16) a; } __bf16 convert2(float a) { return (__bf16) a; } compiled with -march

[Bug tree-optimization/119552] Deduplicate __divmodbitint4 calls for quotient and remainder

2025-03-31 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119552 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/119552] New: Deduplicate __divmodbitint4 calls for quotient and remainder

2025-03-31 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- _BitInt(1280) a, b, c, d; void divide() { c = a/b; d = a%b; } calls __divmodbitint4 twice Relevant bug: https://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/103216] missed optimization, phiopt/vrp?

2021-12-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103216 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/86604] phiopt missed optimization of conditional add

2021-12-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86604 mcccs at gmx dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug target/93082] macOS Authorization.h needs fixinclude

2020-11-27 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082 --- Comment #4 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- (In reply to Fabian Groffen from comment #3) > The problem with this snippet is that it doesn't work on Frameworks, does > it? At least for me, it seems it searches from usr/include onl

[Bug web/95165] New: Since 9.1 we do have ISO_Fortran_binding.h

2020-05-16 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- At https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Further-Interoperability-of-Fortran-with-C.html#Further-Interoperability-of-Fortran-with-C outdated statement: > GNU Fortran always uses

[Bug target/93082] macOS Authorization.h needs fixinclude

2019-12-29 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082 --- Comment #2 from mcccs at gmx dot com --- Reported on the "other side" https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44406 Changing it to enum works too, my only doubt is that it has a different width and sign (but better than not compiling

[Bug target/93082] New: macOS Authorization.h needs fixinclude

2019-12-27 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- This bug has existed for at least two years. In Authorization.h: ``` static const size_t kAuthorizationExternalFormLength = 32; typedef struct { char bytes

[Bug middle-end/90348] Small inlined function has local variables in invalid stack location

2019-05-05 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90348 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment #2 from MCCCS

[Bug target/83531] Build broken on macOS 10.13.2

2019-01-17 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83531 --- Comment #6 from MCCCS --- After reading your comment, I noticed that there were two things I forgot to mention: 1 - availability.h is the file where "API_AVAILABLE" is defined for Clang. 2 - the part of the file the patch changes is 1:1 cop

[Bug target/83531] Build broken on macOS 10.13.2

2019-01-16 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83531 --- Comment #4 from MCCCS --- Iain could you please test if this patch works for you too? If so, I'll send it as a patch tomorrow (For me, it even fixes g++.dg/other/darwin-cfstring1.C): Index: fixincludes/fixincl.x =

[Bug target/83531] Build broken on macOS 10.13.2

2019-01-14 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83531 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment #2 from MCCCS

[Bug c/88645] Don't assume functions are always nonnull if there's __attribute__((weak_import)), similar to __attribute__((weak))

2019-01-01 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88645 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/88645] Don't assume functions are always nonnull if there's __attribute__((weak_import)), similar to __attribute__((weak))

2018-12-31 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88645 --- Comment #1 from MCCCS --- Typo: fix can be added to "decl_with_nonnull_addr_p" of "/c-family/c-common.c" if anyone is interested.

[Bug c/88645] New: Don't assume functions are always nonnull if there's __attribute__((weak_import)), similar to __attribute__((weak))

2018-12-31 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- OS: Darwin/macOS Test vector: extern void a (void) __a

[Bug target/88035] missing _mm512_reduce_round_pd() et al

2018-12-08 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88035 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment #1 from MCCCS

[Bug target/86393] GCC-8 appears to not detect AVX512 on iMac Pro 2018

2018-12-06 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86393 --- Comment #7 from MCCCS --- The problem was that the LLVM assembler required -mavx512f. I've researched it and found that this LLVM bug was fixed months and shipped with LLVM 7. Apple updates Xcode's LLVM with one year delay, and it should be f

[Bug target/88353] AVX512 instructions on macOS using Xcode Clang's assembler needs extra flags

2018-12-05 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88353 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/86393] GCC-8 appears to not detect AVX512 on iMac Pro 2018

2018-12-05 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86393 MCCCS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcccs at gmx dot com --- Comment #5 from MCCCS

[Bug target/88353] New: AVX512 instructions on macOS using Xcode Clang's assembler needs extra flags

2018-12-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
erity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- Note: You can skip to the tldr. #include int main(void) { __m512i a; a = _mm512_conflict_epi32(a); return (int)a[1]; } $

[Bug tree-optimization/88014] New: Restrict/C2X/N2260 Restricted function argument

2018-11-14 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- N2260 ( http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2260.pdf ) has been integrated to C2X, according to https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2018/11/12/c2x/ . Code taken

[Bug bootstrap/87788] [9 Regression] Bootstrap fails for x86_64-apple-darwin* with default languages selection after D addition.

2018-11-05 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87788 --- Comment #16 from MCCCS --- Hi, could you please change the component from "bootstrap" to "d" ? The same error occurs during non-bootstrap compiling too. Otherwise this is in the wrong category, people might not see this and send duplicates.

[Bug d/87876] New: Mac failing: conversion from longdouble to long int is ambiguous

2018-11-04 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Priority: P3 Component: d Assignee: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- macOS 10.14.1 compiled with GCC 8.2 /Users/username/Downloads/gcc-trunk/gcc/d/dmd/constfold.c:1162:50: error: conversion from 'real_t&

[Bug web/87829] New: Contradiction about -fReorder-Blocks

2018-10-31 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- On this page: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html (invoke.texi) It says: @option{-Os} disables the following optimization flags: @gccoptlist{-falign-functions -falign

[Bug tree-optimization/87261] New: Optimize bool expressions

2018-09-09 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- (~x & y) | ~(x | y) (x | y) ^ (x | ~y) (x & y) | ~(x | y) (~x | y) ^ (x ^ y) (x ^ y) | ~(x | y) Patch ready, will send it soon. Submitted here to reserve a `prABCDE.c` file in gcc.dg.

[Bug tree-optimization/87186] Does not inline constant to simplify bitwise expression

2018-09-02 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87186 --- Comment #4 from MCCCS --- Flags: -O2 -fdump-tree-original Code: int f1 (int x, int s) { return ~(~(x|s)|x)|~(~(x|s)|s); } int f2 (int x, int s) { const int t = x|s; return ~(~t|x)|~(~t|s); } int f3 (int x, int s) { const int t = ~(x|s); r

[Bug tree-optimization/87186] Does not inline constant to simplify bitwise expression

2018-09-01 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87186 --- Comment #1 from MCCCS --- It can simplify ~(~(x|s)|x)|~(~(x|s)|s) to s^x but it can't simplify const int t = x|s; ~(~t|x)|~(~t|s) or const int t = ~(x|s); ~(t|x)|~(t|s) or const int t = ~x&~s; ~(t|x)|~(t|s)

[Bug tree-optimization/87186] New: Does not inline constant to sim

2018-09-01 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: ---

[Bug tree-optimization/87009] Can't find XOR pattern applying De Morgan sequentially

2018-08-18 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87009 --- Comment #1 from MCCCS --- Proposed patch: Index: gcc/match.pd === --- gcc/match.pd(revision 263646) +++ gcc/match.pd(working copy) @@ -776,6 +776,11 @@ DEFINE_I

[Bug tree-optimization/87009] New: Can't find XOR pattern applying De Morgan sequentially

2018-08-18 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
y: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- Optimization: -Ofast Suggested debugging layout: https://godbolt.org/g/ERWctt int xor_int(int a, int b) { ... } Don't work: int x = ~(a|b); return

[Bug tree-optimization/86710] New: 3 missing logarithm optimizations

2018-07-28 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- I've looked at match.pd, and spotted missing properties of logarithm. I could poorly write the code for two, still needs to check that the log base is the same: (for logs (LOG

[Bug tree-optimization/86604] New: Compiler can't think of smaller variable ranges

2018-07-20 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
onent: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- Summary: The compiler thinks variables as of the widest domain. (32 bits for int, 64 bits for int64_t) It's possible to optimize further by giving the compi

[Bug tree-optimization/86136] Modular multiplication optimization

2018-06-24 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86136 --- Comment #3 from MCCCS --- What about unsigned int k (unsigned int a) { if (a > 5) { __builtin_unreachable(); } return (a * 83) % 5; }

[Bug c/86150] New: Trunk Segmentation Fault

2018-06-14 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- This has been happening since ~5 days ago. -v output: Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-snapshot/bin/g++ COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20180611/bin

[Bug tree-optimization/86136] Modular multiplication optimization

2018-06-13 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86136 --- Comment #1 from MCCCS --- Note: It can notice (a * n) % k = 0 if n is a multiple of k. The bug happens only if n % k != 0.

[Bug tree-optimization/86136] New: Modular multiplication optimization

2018-06-13 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- Optimization: Ofast GCC can't see that (a * n) % k = (a * (n % k)) % k (even) when n is known at compile time. As a result, int k (int a) { return (a * t) % 5; } a

[Bug tree-optimization/85971] New: Really Simple "If" with one function call inside is not optimized efficiently

2018-05-29 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- GCC: 8 or 9/trunk Optimization: O3 or Ofast Code: ``` int PolyMod(int s); void CreateChecksum(int isTe

[Bug rtl-optimization/85283] New: Generates 20 lines of assembly while only one assembly instruction is enough.

2018-04-08 Thread mcccs at gmx dot com
: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mcccs at gmx dot com Target Milestone: --- GCC version: trunk/20180407 (also older versions) Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Compile options: -Ofast -mavx2 -mfma -Wall