https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think r0-112851-g15694fdd6d84db changed the diagnostic by making
-fno-deduce-init-list the default.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43
--- Comment #1 from Paul Eggert ---
Created attachment 55789
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55789&action=edit
asm code generated by gcc -O2 -S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43
--- Comment #2 from Paul Eggert ---
Created attachment 55790
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55790&action=edit
asm code that's 38% faster on my platform
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But I don't know why -fno-deduce-init-list only affects the diagnostic for one
of the function templates.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like you don't have the 32-bit headers installed. See
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ#gnu_stubs-32.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|tree-optimization
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
_22 = *iter_57;
if (_22 >= 0)
goto ; [90.00%]
else
goto ; [10.00%]
[local count: 860067200]:
_76 = (long long unsigned int) _22;
_15 = sum_31 + _76;
goto ; [100.00%]
...
[local cou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94866
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Uros Bizjak :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6dd73f0f00f454a05552b008a1d56560bd3f1d4a
commit r14-3471-g6dd73f0f00f454a05552b008a1d56560bd3f1d4a
Author: Uros Bizjak
Date: Thu Au
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94866
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=07
--- Comment #6 from Zebediah Figura ---
(In reply to Zebediah Figura from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/5969976.Bvae8NF9fS@polaris/
>
> Again, I'm not sure what you're try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44
Bug ID: 44
Summary: RFE: could -fanalyzer warn about assertions that have
side effects?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
See e.g.:
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/PRE31-C.+Avoid+side+effects+in+arguments+to+unsafe+macros
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10593492/catching-assert-with-side-effects
cppcheck:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think we should improve the toplevel configure to error out if including
errno.h fails.
So instead of:
```
echo "int main () { return 0; }" > conftest.c
```
We should do:
```
echo "#include " > c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45
Bug ID: 45
Summary: istream::operator>>(streambuf*) does not set gcount
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35095
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
See also bug 6906 and bug 57612
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106677
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-08-24
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105369
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80770
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
For aarch64 we get this from combine:
```
Trying 8, 10 -> 12:
8: r92:SI=r96:QI#0&0x1
10: r93:SI=r92:SI^0x1
REG_DEAD r92:SI
12: zero_extract(r99:QI#0,0x1,0)=r93:SI
REG_DEAD r93:SI
Failed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110823
--- Comment #5 from Paul Eggert ---
Also see bug 43 for a related performance issue, which is perhaps more
important given the current state of bleeding-edge GNU diffutils.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
> I see, we can add an alternative like "noavx2,avx2" to generate
> vmaskmovps/pd when avx2 is not available for integer.
It's better to change assmeble output as
27423 if (TARGET_AVX2)
27424return "vma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to john.harper from comment #5)
Thanks John, I had a moment to look at this. I know where to do the
implementation but I have not decided how yet.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hongyu Wang :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e62fe74e5af913079ba296c74759cd74c0759e8e
commit r14-3473-ge62fe74e5af913079ba296c74759cd74c0759e8e
Author: Hongyu Wang
Date: Thu A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Hongyu Wang
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bb791011b39813bc7b6fdd0d9831247ace199615
commit r13-7758-gbb791011b39813bc7b6fdd0d9831247ace199615
Author: Hongyu Wang
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27
Hongyu Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110628
--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> > patch posted
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628231.html
>
> Yay! I stand re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46
Bug ID: 46
Summary: Some patterns in match.pd are no longer needed
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: compile-time-hog
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47
Bug ID: 47
Summary: bitwise_inverted_equal_p can be used in the `(x | y) &
(~x ^ y)` pattern to catch more
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-08-25
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48
Bug ID: 48
Summary: Missing boolean optimizations due to comparisons
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhanceme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-08-25
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49
Bug ID: 49
Summary: bool0 != bool1 should be convert into bool0 ^ bool1
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhanc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Summary|bool0 !=
Greetings.
I have come across erroneous behavior whilst comparing optimizations
performed by different compilers. Said behavior persists through
different versions of GCC and flags. The output from GCC is incorrect
and diverges from all compilers.
In order to reproduce aforementioned behavior, co
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 8:06 PM libreknight via Gcc-bugs
wrote:
>
> Greetings.
>
> I have come across erroneous behavior whilst comparing optimizations
> performed by different compilers. Said behavior persists through
> different versions of GCC and flags. The output from GCC is incorrect
> and d
On 2023-08-25 03:06, libreknight wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I have come across erroneous behavior whilst comparing optimizations
> performed by different compilers. Said behavior persists through
> different versions of GCC and flags. The output from GCC is incorrect
> and diverges from all compilers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36
--- Comment #1 from JuzheZhong ---
Hi, Richi.
It faild at RISC-V scatter store cases:
When trying to generate gimple build:
...
.MASK_LEN_SCATTER_STORE (vectp_y.28_130, { 0, 2, 4, ... }, 1, vect__25.27_127,
mask__26.20_117, _135, 0);
...
ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111064
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
The loop is like
doublefoo (double* a, unsigned* b, double* c, int n)
{
double sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i != n; i++)
{
sum += a[i] * c[b[i]];
}
return sum;
}
After disab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50
Bug ID: 50
Summary: (vec CMP vec) != (vec CMP vec) should just produce
(vec CMP vec) ^ (vec CMP vec)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-08-25
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> duplicate of PR28?
Yes. Fixed in this morning's compiler, that has your fix for that
bug in it.
Also, the git range I specified contains the same probab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51
Bug ID: 51
Summary: [12/13/14 Regression] Wrong code at -O0 on
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
101 - 148 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
