https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98502
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98502
--- Comment #2 from Fredrik Noring ---
Thanks, Andrew. I felt certain it's a GCC bug. :) Will the patch be backported
to GCC 9.x and 10.x? It'll take a while before 11 is commonly available, I
think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97865
--- Comment #30 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c85bc938ccf75ea45c00e430f715544ff396e5b5
commit r10-9196-gc85bc938ccf75ea45c00e430f715544ff396e5b5
Author: Iain Sandoe
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97438
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4bca11333c274ab5d06677ed952afa097c7d3c78
commit r10-9197-g4bca11333c274ab5d06677ed952afa097c7d3c78
Author: Iain Sandoe
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930
--- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier ---
> The testcase seems to be optimized into return a >> b; and already e.g. GCC
> 4.4 does that.
> So it is unclear why this has been reported and what difference you found.
What I observed is that it is opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I can't reproduce that.
I get:
movl%edi, %eax
movl%esi, %ecx
shrl%cl, %eax
ret
for that function, and LLVM emits the same code with the first two insns
swapped.
Onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jh at suse dot cz
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Ravier ---
For this exact code :
unsigned f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
return a / (unsigned long long)(1U << b);
}
compiled with a trunk-based GCC built yesterday for x86-64-linux-gnu configured
with: ../gcc-trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504
Bug ID: 98504
Summary: [11 Regression] bootstrap broken in libgo on
ia64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
make[6]: *** [Makefile:2962: runtime.lo] Error 1
make[6]: Leaving directory '/<>/build/ia64-linux-gnu/libgo'
make[5]: *** [Makefile:2292: all-recursive] Error 1
make[5]: Leaving directory '/<>/build/ia64-lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98504
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
Does it also fail without LTO?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98498
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Oh, C++, I was trying C. Apparently this optimization is done by the C FE
only.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98505
Bug ID: 98505
Summary: Capture groups under quantifier must capture only last
match
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98506
Bug ID: 98506
Summary: ../../gcc/libcody/resolver.cc:178:43: error:
'O_CLOEXEC' was not declared in thi s scope
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
`--param=modref-max-depth=0` makes the bug disappear.
Looking at `-fdump-tree-all` the harmful optimization happens at `107.fre3`
where:
```
if (&MEM[(struct string *)&D.2237 + 48B]._M_local_buf != _
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98499
--- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Managed to shrink example even further. Now fails in `037t.fre1`:
```c++
struct string {
char * _M_buf;
// local store
char _M_local_buf[16];
__attribute__((noinline)) string() : _M_buf(_M_loca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96930
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The optimization is there, but just has different conditions:
/* Although it would be tempting to shorten always here, that
loses on some targets, since the modulo instruction is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461
--- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu ---
> 128: https://godbolt.org/z/Exo3d9
zero_extend should be redudant, add another combine splitter for the bellow?
Failed to match this instruction:
(set (reg:SI 91 [ _6 ])
(zero_extend:SI (subreg:HI (unspe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98507
Bug ID: 98507
Summary: timezone is incorrect on last day of year for "TZ"
hours
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98464
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|linkw at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98461
--- Comment #10 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #9)
> > 128: https://godbolt.org/z/Exo3d9
>
> zero_extend should be redudant, add another combine splitter for the bellow?
Pass_combine failed to match combine_splitter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96891
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
--- Comment #14 from Hongtao.liu ---
*** Bug 96891 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98332
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98428
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Summary|[11 regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98437
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98403
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
For the record, grub2 package is affected by the PR as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91257
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Rogério de Souza Moraes from comment #12)
> Hi Richard,
>
> first, thank you for the great work improving the GCC performance.
>
> The R&D team which I am working with provided two test cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98270
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Priority|P3
30 matches
Mail list logo
