[Bug target/120011] [15/16 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4 -Os since r15-9176-g564e4e08190229

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #13 from Stefan Kneifel --- Correct, -R'ing this patch against 15.1.1 sources reverses the regression.

[Bug target/120011] [15/16 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4 -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Kneifel --- Hongtao Liu's patch mentioned in Comment 1 does NOT retract the regression.

[Bug target/120011] [15/16 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4 -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Kneifel --- It was the version shipped with Fedora 42 Release: https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/42/Everything/source/tree/Packages/g/gcc-15.0.1-0.11.fc42.src.rpm Regards, Stefan

[Bug target/120011] [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Kneifel --- Oh I see that the error occurs only if one of the size optimization options (-Os,-Oz) is active: [64 bit environment] gcc -Os -pipe -c addtf3.c works gcc -Os -pipe -c addtf3.c -mar

[Bug target/120011] [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Kneifel --- Created attachment 61243 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61243&action=edit creduced addtf3.c from libgcc

[Bug libgcc/120011] New: [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120011 Bug ID: 120011 Summary: [15 Regression] Impossible asm constraints in 32 bit libgcc when compiling with -march=x86-64-v4 Product: gcc Version: 15.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/106696] Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Stefan Kneifel changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Stefan Kneif

[Bug ipa/106696] New: Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106696 Bug ID: 106696 Summary: Fallthrough between functions without proper return statement when optimizing Product: gcc Version: 12.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity

[Bug target/103661] __builtin_cpu_supports returns a negative integer for avx512vbmi2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103661 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Kneifel --- Created attachment 51978 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51978&action=edit Testcase Without the proposed patch, it compiles to: : 0: 50

[Bug target/103661] __builtin_cpu_supports returns a negative integer for avx512vbmi2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103661 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Kneifel --- Created attachment 51975 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51975&action=edit First try of a patch, making it unsigned (and correcting the resolver generator)

[Bug target/103661] New: __builtin_cpu_supports returns a negative integer for avx512vbmi2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103661 Bug ID: 103661 Summary: __builtin_cpu_supports returns a negative integer for avx512vbmi2 Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug ipa/101726] target_clone resolver does not generate PIC despite -fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Kneifel --- OK works for me, thank you!

[Bug target/101726] target_clone resolver does not generate PIC despite -fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Kneifel --- Yes, but a programmer might choose to implement target clones for a shared library using another language, e.g. hand-optimized assembler code (this was the actual problem I had). Forbidding target_clone de

[Bug target/101726] target_clone resolver does not generate PIC despite -fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Kneifel --- OK, so declaring the default function as local might make gcc assume that the function body is available in the same translation unit, thus rendering the relocation locally resolvable. Thus said, I tried

[Bug c/101726] New: target_clone resolver does not generate PIC despite -fPIC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726 Bug ID: 101726 Summary: target_clone resolver does not generate PIC despite -fPIC Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P