https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93502
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Another question would be whether it's easy for the programmer to direct
> std::regex_match to use the heap?
No that's not possible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93502
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Nadav Har'El from comment #2)
> Maybe you mean it is a dup of
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86164 ?
Yes that's what I was thinking of.
> But I'm not sure. I honestly don't un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
--- Comment #4 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think this code is undefined
Thank you for having a look.
-fsanitize=undefined doesn't complain.
x = x >> __builtin_bswap64 (-a) | x << (-__builtin_bswap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 47738
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47738&action=edit
only partially reduced testcase, with always defined shifts
It also needs more flags to reproduce:
-Os -fno-expe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93497
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93498
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93499
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93500
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93501
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92123
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2595f25cdaf4f16d04a1078a487b2ecc126cae29
commit r10-6344-g2595f25cdaf4f16d04a1078a487b2ecc126cae29
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91824
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b285bebe6ad1e9f6416f0eb6cb69edc44db7813c
commit r10-6345-gb285bebe6ad1e9f6416f0eb6cb69edc44db7813c
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91824
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d37c81f476c17d292943189335d745c3fb817b7d
commit r10-6346-gd37c81f476c17d292943189335d745c3fb817b7d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #20)
> And thanks for the gcov-analysis improvemnets. It is quite handy tool now :)
Good to hear.
> and it is interesting to know where the many-target calls are. Clear
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93504
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
/* (x & ~m) | (y & m) -> ((x ^ y) & m) ^ x */
I guess several transformations like this one which match (unary m) could do
with a second version for the case where m is constant (and thus (unary m) is
already
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #22 from Martin Liška ---
For GCC I see the frequency of only one target aligned:
== Stats for before ==
stats for indirect_call:
total: 9210 freq: 5943636909
not executed at all: 6249
invalid: 669 (7.26%) freq:2219809025 (37.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92309
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92311
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92323
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92319
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92706
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645
Bug 92645 depends on bug 92706, which changed state.
Bug 92706 Summary: SRA confuses FRE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92706
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is stat for clang build with current mainline. half of invalidated
counters is pretty high (as expected given large number of runs merged)
== Stats for instrumented-gcc-new/ ==
stats for indirect_call:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #24 from Jan Hubicka ---
You can get gcda files from the treeherder links
https://firefox-ci-tc.services.mozilla.com/api/queue/v1/task/GacHgozaSRWbybgeUGzHVQ/runs/0/artifacts/public/build/profdata.tar.xz
https://firefox-ci-tc.services
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka ---
I wonder if that is because of parallel updates. There is quite a lot of time
between prunning and streaming out. If Firefox forks while other threads are
running, it will mess up the streamed data quite badly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92325
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92327
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92332
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92331
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92340
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93469
--- Comment #8 from Karen ---
Thanks for the explanation.
In fact it doesn't work even for -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 as the latest POSIX
edition doesn't specify the aligned_alloc function.
On the other hand I don't observe that _XOPEN_SOURCE affects
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92358
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92374
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92381
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92380
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92382
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92395
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92402
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92332
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92413
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92415
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92434
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92924
--- Comment #26 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #25)
> I wonder if that is because of parallel updates. There is quite a lot of
> time between prunning and streaming out. If Firefox forks while other
> threads are runn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92645
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
So after the PR92706 fix there's still a lot left on the table.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92455
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93506
Bug ID: 93506
Summary: Create hybrid of -I and -isystem that is like -I but
deactivates warnings
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92456
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92497
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92499
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92523
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92541
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92544
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92547
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93507
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93506
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93507
Bug ID: 93507
Summary: Missed abstraction removal in VN
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92548
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93469
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Karen from comment #8)
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> In fact it doesn't work even for -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 as the latest POSIX
> edition doesn't specify the aligned_alloc function.
But it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92556
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93508
Bug ID: 93508
Summary: VN doesn't handle _chk functions or valueize their
length
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93508
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92565
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90338
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92567
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92570
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92568
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
--- Comment #6 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #5)
> Created attachment 47738 [details]
> only partially reduced testcase, with always defined shifts
>
> It also needs more flags to reproduce:
> -Os -fno-expensive-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93506
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
P.S. the name -fsystem-headers was chosen to mirror -Wsystem-headers because
those two options would interact. Marking a dir with -fsystem-headers would
cause warnings to be suppressed for headers in that p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92587
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92592
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90338
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paolo Carlini :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b0e9b18ed432c4b7cb9a4b963b65911b4c103cbe
commit r10-6347-gb0e9b18ed432c4b7cb9a4b963b65911b4c103cbe
Author: Paolo Carlini
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92611
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92613
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92568
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I don't think the TARGET attribute ever matters for the mapping rules.
What matters is whether a variable is mentioned in !$omp declare target to/link
clauses (for OpenMP 5 there is also some implicit discove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92624
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92628
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92630
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92570
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.5.0
Summary|clang fails t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93505
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Still bisecting it, but I'd say the bug is in expand_binop:
/* If we were trying to rotate, and that didn't work, try rotating
the other direction before falling back to shifts and bitwise-or. */
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92652
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92658
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92660
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92568
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Oops, sorry, you are right, have been looking just at OpenMP 4.5, in OpenMP 5
that rule indeed has been added, but it is about all of
TARGET/ALLOCATABLE/POINTER.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92662
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92667
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92672
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 92671, which changed state.
Bug 92671 Summary: gcc/c/c-parser.c: minor ( and ) tidyup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92671
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92671
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92687
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92689
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92700
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92707
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92711
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92717
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92726
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2019-11-30 00:00:0
1 - 100 of 258 matches
Mail list logo