https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64406
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x32
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
There are a number of things that make it complicated.
1) gcc doesn't like to vectorize when the number of iterations is not known at
compile time.
2) gcc doesn't vectorize anything already involving complex or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64411
Bug ID: 64411
Summary: ICE: in verify_target_availability, at
sel-sched.c:1577 with -Os -mcmodel=medium -fPIC
-fschedule-insns -fselective-scheduling
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #2 from Conrad ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> 3) the ABI for complex uses 2 separate double instead of a vector of 2
> double.
Technically yes, but in practice aren't the 2 separate doubles guaranteed to be
consecuti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
Bug ID: 64412
Summary: [regression] ICE in offload compiler: in extract_insn,
at recog.c:2327
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63923
iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64410
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Conrad from comment #2)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> > 3) the ABI for complex uses 2 separate double instead of a vector of 2
> > double.
>
> Technically yes, but in practice aren
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail dot
com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
For the record a patch has been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-03/msg00165.html.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60507
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
What is the status of the patch in comment 4?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63743
Yuri Rumyantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ysrumyan at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #17 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
However, it is a patch that doesn't do the job.
Cheers
Paul
On Dec 26, 2014 2:35 PM, "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> However, it is a patch that doesn't do the job.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
Almost!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
--- Comment #9 from Matthew Woehlke ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> No, really, that's not how make_unique works. You do not use 'new' with
> make_unique, that's the whole point [...]
D'oh, sorry :-). Not sure what I was thin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64413
Bug ID: 64413
Summary: [AArch64/ARMv7] ICE in copy_to_mode_reg, at
explow.c:654
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
--- Comment #4 from Steven Noonan ---
Ahh, didn't even think about an x32/ms_abi compatibility problems. That totally
makes sense. It probably shouldn't work anyway, but an ICE is obviously not the
right reaction from the compiler. What I should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64409
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.5
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
A patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64414
Bug ID: 64414
Summary: cc1plus: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.7
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64412
--- Comment #2 from iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> (In reply to iverbin from comment #0)
> > To reproduce using Intel Xeon Phi emulation:
> > 1. Build offload and host compilers as described in
> > https://g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64414
--- Comment #1 from Jason Pyeron ---
In an attempt to be lazy, I added a .h file to refer to a .h file in the parent
directory.
2154b9ff583610a5ab97821ed6b45646df2f4e2b:src/Main/Unix/System.h:
#include "../System.h"
removing that file eliminate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36557
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Still happens. It now does
cntlzw 3,3
srwi 3,3,5
xori 3,3,0x1
rldicl 3,3,0,63
blr
which is better but not exactly ideal yet.
x8713cdb execute_function_todo
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1947
0x8712dfe do_per_function
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1632
0x8713e85 execute_todo
../../gcc-5/gcc/passes.c:1997
GCC 5.0.0 20141226 (experimental) /r219070/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64416
Bug ID: 64416
Summary: RFE: Support REAL128 on arm
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
A
26 matches
Mail list logo
