https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116472
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|X86_64 |x86_64-*-*
Last reconfirmed|2024-08-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116476
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116478
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116372
Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116405
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #192 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 58994
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58994&action=edit
a testcase for a wrong code issue which is preprocessed gcc/pointer-query.cc
I identified a wrong code with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #193 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #192)
Related parts of RTL dumps.
[.ira dump]
(insn 1747 1745 1748 125 (set (reg/f:SI 2854)
(plus:SI (reg/f:SI 153 sfp)
(const_int -136 [0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #194 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 58995
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58995&action=edit
simply a trial patch, not a real fix
With this explicit emit_clobber, all the segfaults I reported are gone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #195 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #193)
Great results!
>
> It looks that LRA allocates r4 to the psuedo register r2854 and assumes that
> it's preserved beyond the insn 1752 block_lump_real_i4.
> Can
with-as=/usr/bin/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-as --enable-libsanitizer
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r15-3158-20240825101449-g91f549537ca-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-aarch64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.0 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #196 from Andreas Schwab ---
Both forms are completely equivalent (a multi element template is implicitly
surrounded by parallel).
a-aarch64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.0 20240825 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #197 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #196)
> Both forms are completely equivalent (a multi element template is implicitly
> surrounded by parallel).
Yes and I just fixed a bug dealing with that and gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115866
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andi Kleen :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c9ccc3961f5b8d333f5081b377cd9ee9e33079f7
commit r15-3167-gc9ccc3961f5b8d333f5081b377cd9ee9e33079f7
Author: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Aug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or rather the issue is here:
5320 rtx plhs = expand_normal (lhs);
5321 rtx pcmp = emit_store_flag (NULL_RTX, EQ, plhs, const1_rtx, mode, 0,
0);
We are expanding:
int _1;
uint128_t _2;
_Bool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Another testcase:
```
int
foo(unsigned __int128 b)
{
return __builtin_popcountg(b) == 1;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58998
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58998&action=edit
patch which I am testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116472
--- Comment #6 from 8dcc.git at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #4)
> > I tried compiling the source with:
> >
> > gcc -S -masm=intel -no-pie -o output.s source.c
> >
> > And the issue still persists.
>
> -no-pie is o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116479
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116479
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116463
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
Bug ID: 116481
Summary: Compilation error caused by -Warray-bounds and -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #1 from Bruno Haible ---
A workaround is to declare the local variable 'tramp_address' volatile:
= foo.c =
extern void tramp ();
int is_trampoline (void* function)
{
void* volatile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||56456
Target|hppa-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.1.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> ./a.ltrans6.ltrans.212t.forwprop4
>
> Removing dead stmt noDataCandVec$_M_start_888 = PHI <_1783(176), _577(186)>
> ...
> Removing dead stmt:_598 = _888 + 16;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #4 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The error message happens on x86_64 also.
Indeed.
> Note I think this code is undefined really unless you use the volatile.
Why? This code is accessing read-on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Bruno Haible from comment #4)
> Why? This code is accessing read-only memory near the address of the 'tramp'
> function. Why would it need 'volatile' when doing so? (I don't claim that
> this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
--- Comment #32 from andi at firstfloor dot org ---
The feature is currently only supported with standard C/C++ attributes
([[clang/gnu::musttail]]), not __attribute__
But given that you have existing code that uses the old syntax
and clang suppo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #198 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #194)
> Created attachment 58995 [details]
> simply a trial patch, not a real fix
>
> With this explicit emit_clobber, all the segfaults I reported are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115851
--- Comment #1 from Dan Klishch ---
GCC seems to do checks for coroutine-related types more eagerly now, so the
original minified reproducer is rejected. Nonetheless, the underlying issue
persists, which can be shown using this snippet:
```
#in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115851
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116482
Bug ID: 116482
Summary: Bogus -Wunused-parameter with C++ coroutines
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: c++-coroutines
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116466
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Looking at this, I would fully expect that in an optimizing compilation that
the redundant extension would be eliminated. Are you seeing the redundant
sign extensions in the final assembly output or just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
--- Comment #33 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu ---
I don't know what the issues are about whether to support __attribute__,
whether the notation is obsolete or nonstandard.
If gcc doesn't support this notation, it might lead to just one more
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116466
--- Comment #3 from cui xu ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #2)
> Looking at this, I would fully expect that in an optimizing compilation that
> the redundant extension would be eliminated. Are you seeing the redundant
> sign exten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97448
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96866
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116030
--- Comment #4 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
Submitted a patch as:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/660983.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116030
--- Comment #5 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
And the new version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/66.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116030
--- Comment #6 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #5)
> And the new version:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-August/66.html
Sorry, -save-temps is still there.
As Kewen's comments:
https://gcc.gnu.org/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116166
--- Comment #30 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15)
> We're also doing a lot of redundant stmt simplifications by likely
> quadratically
> exploring jump threading paths. And each hybrid_jt_simplifier::simplif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #199 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 59000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59000&action=edit
a patch for an experiment
I added explicit register clobbers after all s-function calls as an experiment,
a
46 matches
Mail list logo
