https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115155
Bug ID: 115155
Summary: [11/12 Regression] signed integer overflow check
missing
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108256
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bic60176 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115155
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
I'm bisecting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115156
Bug ID: 115156
Summary: [14 Regression] passing zero to __builtin_clzl() check
missing
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115156
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am not 100% sure this if this case matters as the return value of
__builtin_clzl is very much unused.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115156
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.2
Summary|[14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115109
--- Comment #7 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
PATCH v2
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/652109.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 58244
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58244&action=edit
Preprocessed source from building read-vorbis.c with gcc-14 and -fverbose-asm
(In reply to Oleg En
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114982
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1073469074ff132478ec8d923ed8635c672f7d9b
commit r15-651-g1073469074ff132478ec8d923ed8635c672f7d9b
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #4)
> Created attachment 58244 [details]
> Preprocessed source from building read-vorbis.c with gcc-14 and -fverbose-asm
>
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 58245
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58245&action=edit
Preprocessed source from building read-vorbis.c with gcc-11 and -fverbose-asm
(In reply to Oleg En
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #5)
>
> The following hunk seems to fix the ".align 1" following the short byte table
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/sh/sh.cc b/gcc/config/sh/sh.cc
> index ef3c2e6791d..0134932
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115156
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #7)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #5)
> >
> > The following hunk seems to fix the ".align 1" following the short byte
> > table
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/sh/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115148
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #8)
>
> It looks like something dpulicates the ".align 1" directive after the byte
> table and then also duplicates it. Perhaps the directive is treated wrongly
> as an insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115142
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1ce9c37ed68136a99d44c8301990c184ba41849
commit r15-652-ge1ce9c37ed68136a99d44c8301990c184ba41849
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Sun May 19 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115157
Bug ID: 115157
Summary: incorrect TBAA for derived types involving enum types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115158
Bug ID: 115158
Summary: pru: undefined reference to _getentropy after
r15-518-g99b1daae18c095
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115158
Dimitar Dimitrov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
Bug ID: 115159
Summary: internal compiler error: in nothrow_spec_p, at
cp/except.cc:1206 when using modules and
QCoreApplication
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115158
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, _GLIBCXX_HAVE_GETENTROPY maybe should not defined for PRU while
configuring libstdc++ ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112868
--- Comment #17 from Sam James ---
PR113652 remains a problem and I guess it's more of a problem for landing this
change in a release, as it means PR113652 will affect more people.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115157
uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
yep, r14-3432-gddd64a6ec3b38e fixed it on trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
Optimizing statement _5 = () _2;
LKUP STMT _5 = nop_expr _2
2>>> STMT _5 = nop_expr _2
Optimizing statement _3 = -_5;
LKUP STMT _3 = negate_expr _5
2>>> STMT _3 = negate_expr _5
Optimizing statement f.b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
Matching expression match.pd:2310, gimple-match-3.cc:90
Matching expression match.pd:2310, gimple-match-3.cc:90
Applying pattern match.pd:4890, gimple-match-2.cc:4798
Matching expression match.pd:160, gimple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|14.1.0 |
Summary|[13 Regression] wro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115154
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58247
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58247&action=edit
Easier to (reduced) understand testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54848
Bruno Haible changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bruno at clisp dot org
--- Comment #2 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #11 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #10)
> A patch like Comment 8 could definitely solve the problem. But I need to
> test more benchmarks to see if there is surprise.
>
> But, yes, as Uros said in Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115146
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115146
--- Comment #11 from Levy Hsu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #8)
> (In reply to Levy Hsu from comment #5)
> > case E_V16QImode:
> > mode = V8HImode;
> > gen_shr = gen_vlshrv8hi3;
> > gen_shl = gen_vashlv8hi3;
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #12 from Haochen Jiang ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #11)
> (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #10)
> > A patch like Comment 8 could definitely solve the problem. But I need to
> > test more benchmarks to see if ther
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
--- Comment #2 from Michał Walenciak ---
Created attachment 58248
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58248&action=edit
preprocessed project files
main.cpp compiled with -freport-bug (ccnR6WAp.out file) plus preprocessed file
w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115038
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
Keywords|EH
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #12)
> (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #11)
> > (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #10)
> > > A patch like Comment 8 could definitely solve the problem. But
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #14 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #11)
> > > (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #10)
> > > > A patch like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115150
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b701306a9b38bd74cdc26c7ece5add22f2203b56
commit r15-658-gb701306a9b38bd74cdc26c7ece5add22f2203b56
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #15 from Haochen Jiang ---
I am doing like this way. Suppose should be same as Comment 8.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-expand.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386-expand.cc
index a6132911e6a..1e8334877d6 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #16 from Hongtao Liu ---
> Should we also run a SPEC on with -O2 -mtune=generic -march=x86-64-v3 to see
> if there is any surprise?
Sure, I guess no.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115069
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #15)
> I am doing like this way. Suppose should be same as Comment 8.
Yes, but IMO the patch in Comment #8 better describes where the problem is.
Please note that wit
47 matches
Mail list logo
