https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67800
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, afomin.mailbox at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67800
>
> --- Comment #5 from Alexander Fomin ---
> Richard, are there any updates on th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68647
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68331
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, vries at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68331
>
> --- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Created attachment 36885
> --> ht
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68640
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Is it used because it ends up in the static chain of the omp_fn and uses the
same (original) qualifiers? And the static chain itself is passed "by
reference"
and thus gets its fields looked at and restrict
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66858
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is related to maybe_retrofit_in_chrg somehow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68647
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68647
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Sorry Uros, forgot to assign this to myself before I've started to work on it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68647
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I also wonder when we have expand_doubleword_clz if we couldn't handle
expand_doubleword_ctz similarly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68432
--- Comment #16 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Dec 2 09:08:49 2015
New Revision: 231161
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231161&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 68432: Add a target hook to control size/speed optab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68432
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68651
Bug ID: 68651
Summary: [5/6 Regression][AArch64] Missing combination of
shift-by-one with other arithmetic patterns with
-mcpu=cortex-a53
Product: gcc
Version: 6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68647
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Sorry Uros, forgot to assign this to myself before I've started to work on
> it.
Ah, nice. I have a target-dependent patch for this, but I agree that generic
solut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68648
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68064
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Any update on this issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65731
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65982
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Honza?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yes, I'm cross-compiling.
The only differences I see are:
* -fdwarf2-cfi-asm; this seemed promising but makes no difference.
* -mtune=generic -march=x86-64; but no dice.
* Very different ggc settings.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68625
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 2 09:47:43 2015
New Revision: 231162
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231162&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-02 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/68625
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #16 from Alexander ---
there are
ld -V
ld: 92453-07 linker ld HP Itanium(R) B.12.62 IPF/IPF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68625
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #17 from John Buddery ---
My ld is slightly older:
ld: 92453-07 linker ld HP Itanium(R) B.12.42 IPF/IPF
It may have been older still when I built gcc, as OS patches have been applied
since then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68570
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Yes, this is fixed with r231162 (PR68625 fix). I'll at least add the
testcase...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68651
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65380
--- Comment #20 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to milan.plzik from comment #19)
> Created attachment 36886 [details]
> Shell script, which compiles ChibiOS and indeed triggers gcc failure
>
> Attached script should trigger the problem when comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68652
Bug ID: 68652
Summary: gamma function hangs on some arguments, returns NaN on
other ones
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68646
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68645
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64919
--- Comment #18 from Joseph John ---
Alexander,
You were also able to build build gcc using almost the latest linker ? My
linker is nearly same as yours so I was thinking is it some linker bugs which
causes issues for me as I saw some references
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68643
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68640
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Is it used because it ends up in the static chain of the omp_fn and uses the
> same (original) qualifiers? And the static chain itself is passed "by
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68570
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Dec 2 10:22:23 2015
New Revision: 231163
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231163&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/68570
* gcc.dg/torture/pr68570.c: New tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65654
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |7.0
Summary|[6 Regression] 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68638
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68639
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #3 from Eric Bot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
>
> Eric Botcazou changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65380
--- Comment #21 from milan.plzik at gmail dot com ---
Unfortunately, I currently don't have dev setup for any non-MCU ARM platform.
Also, ChibiOS non-MCU platforms, so I guess I would need to identify different
test case, assuming it is possible t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68652
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
See PR61810 which shows missed optimizations because of init-regs.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> OTOH I'd just use it as an excuse to drop init-regs.c ...
It has a rather big comment explaining why it was needed though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68652
--- Comment #2 from Jean-Claude Arbaut ---
I will. I was unsure were to post the report, so I tried first here. Thanks to
have checked!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68522
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Fomin ---
We compile it using -m32 -Ofast -funroll-loops
-fno-agressive-loop-optimizations option set.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68653
Bug ID: 68653
Summary: [6 Regression] ICE: in nonnull_arg_p, at tree.c:13853
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68648
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The problem is the post-reload andsi_iorsi3_notsi splitter that can generate a
(not (const_int 1)) rtx rather than doing constant folding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68648
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61810
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
For
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-a-u8-i8-gap7.c execution test
it indeed 'makes combine happy' with enabled vs. disabled diff
***
*** 912,935
(plus:QI (reg:QI 264 [ ivtmp.50 ])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
>
> --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > OTOH I'd just use it as an excuse to dr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 2 Dec 2015, Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
>
> Joost VandeVondele changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68304
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61810
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
vect testsuite is now clean on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68653
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
> Though with the testcase you gave we warn at both -O0 and -O1:
yes, but unfortunately, -Wuninitialized, also warns for 'may be used
uninitialized' whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68193
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68638
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #10)
> [I just checked that -Wuninitialized -Wno-maybe-uninitialized doesn't work]
That sounds like a bug. It works for me on a simple C testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68653
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #12 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #11)
> That sounds like a bug. It works for me on a simple C testcase.
sorry, fat fingers on my side. So, yes, this works
gfortran -c -Werror=uninitialized -Wno-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67800
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, so reverting these changes causes
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad.c scan-tree-dump vect "vectorizing stmts using
SLP"
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-sad.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
loops" 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68304
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
Bug ID: 68654
Summary: [6 Regression] CoreMark Pro performance degradation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Fomin ---
The degrading test is naturally CoreMark itself.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68643
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-12-02, at 5:22 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> so this is set wrongly for your target? Or rather
>
> # Return 1 if compilation with -freorder-blocks-and-partition is error-free
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66051
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
We now run itno
t.c:4:3: note: Build SLP failed: the number of interleaved loads is greater
than the SLP group size _15 = *_14;
which should be an irrelevant restriction in the form it makes (with only
con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68655
Bug ID: 68655
Summary: SSE2 cannot vec_perm of low and high part
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67383
Renlin Li changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68656
Bug ID: 68656
Summary: [4.8, 4.9, 5.0, 6.0 Regression] warning about disabled
var-tracking uses odd location info
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, that revision is unlikely a bisect, correct? It should have zero effects
on code generation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68656
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8, 4.9, 5.0, 6.0 |[4.9/5/6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #8 from Dominique
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Fomin ---
It should, but for some reason we see a stable reproducible degradation between
r228667 and r228668...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68652
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68657
Bug ID: 68657
Summary: [6 Regression] "gcc -Werror=sign-conversion test.i"
shows invalid: -Wsign-conversion is not an option that
controls warnings
Product: gcc
V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68655
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
typedef int v4si __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
v4si bar (v4si a, v4si b)
{
return __builtin_shuffle (a, b, (v4si) { 0, 1, 4, 5 });
}
works just fine using shufps.
It might be that the generic optabs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68656
--- Comment #2 from Bernhard Reutner-Fischer ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Which version worked ok? I think these warnings should simply not output
4.7.4 worked ok.
4.8.5 onward behave like current trunk a.k.a 6.0
> any lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68657
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jules at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68603
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68655
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68634
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56383
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.3 |4.9.4
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68657
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56383
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Dec 2 15:08:18 2015
New Revision: 231181
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231181&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix ambiguity with multiple enable_shared_from_this bases
PR lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68654
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Interesting the only effect could be different GC allocation pattern because
the non-splice variant may end up re-allocating the target vector multiple
times. But this alone should never change code generat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68658
Bug ID: 68658
Summary: [6 Regression] LTO - bogus redefinition of warning
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63861
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cesar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68653
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68659
Bug ID: 68659
Summary: [6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/id-pr45230-1.c
(internal compiler error)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
1 - 100 of 187 matches
Mail list logo
