[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Note, most not too old compilers handle small constant size memcpy as an efficient way to load/store unaligned values and it is also portable. So, instead of *dstp = *srcp ^ *bufp; if all those can be una

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread rapier at psc dot edu via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #8 from Chris Rapier --- My apologies for misunderstanding and for coming across as aggressive in my last response. This section of the code is about 15 years old so it hasn't, obviously, been subject to a close enough review until n

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Chris Rapier from comment #5) > So what you are saying is that behaviour *has* changed and what was a valid > operation for 15 years is now invalid. I'm not mad about that. I just needed > to kn

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread rapier at psc dot edu via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #5 from Chris Rapier --- So what you are saying is that behaviour *has* changed and what was a valid operation for 15 years is now invalid. I'm not mad about that. I just needed to know.

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- You could have checked this very easily using -fsanitize=undefined just like it asks you to at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ and at the top of the page when you created this bug. dst is 512-bit aligned (0x101

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- The testcase segfaults since r13-1607-gc3ed9e0d6e96d8697e4bab994f8acbc5506240ee when the backend started using more aggressively vector instructions for operations like the 128-bit logical ops, but that does

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/114080] Inconsistent handling of unaligned 128bit ints between GCC versions

2024-02-23 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114080 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is undefined behavior, __int128/__int128_t/__uint128_t needs 16-byte alignment.