https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #200 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #199)
> Created attachment 59000 [details]
> a patch for an experiment
>
> I added explicit register clobbers after all s-function calls as an
> experi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #22 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 59001
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59001&action=edit
reduce recursion in forward threader (patch in testing)
As suggested by Richard in PR116166.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> > ./a.ltrans6.ltrans.212t.forwprop4
> >
> > Removing dead stmt noDataCandVec$_M_start_888 = PHI <_1783(176), _5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #23 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #22)
> Created attachment 59001 [details]
> reduce recursion in forward threader (patch in testing)
>
> As suggested by Richard in PR116166.
Should've been more v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
Bug ID: 116483
Summary: RFE: a notion for asm goto to indicate all labels in
the function may be jumped to
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
--- Comment #1 from Xi Ruoyao ---
FWIW in the examples "r"(table) should be "i"(table) instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Ugh - simplify_gimple_switch_label_vec :/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
Bug ID: 116484
Summary: Allow constexpr expression in riscv_rvv_vector_bits
attribute
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This attribute is not documented so ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
Manolis et al., is this one on your list? Sorry to nag, it's just a package
with a lot of reverse dependencies.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116482
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
> But for satisfying some tools analyzing the generated machine code
Also this sounds like a limitation in the tool analyzing the generated code and
outside of gcc; I know helping the tool along is useful b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
--- Comment #9 from Manolis Tsamis ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #8)
> Manolis et al., is this one on your list? Sorry to nag, it's just a package
> with a lot of reverse dependencies.
Hi Sam, yes, with the ifcvt issue now resolved, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116352
--- Comment #10 from Sam James ---
No problem at all! I know it's been a very busy few weeks -- I just wanted to
make sure it wasn't buried in the emails, rather than needing it fixed right
now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> > > ./a.ltrans6.ltrans.212t.forwprop4
> > >
> > > Removing dea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/riscv-no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116484
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
For portability you likely want to convert the function pointer to uintptr_t
and only that to char */long *. That might also avoid GCCs diagnostic.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53b86cac7e77ddff4e8a215408f7331ebc5bf22c
commit r15-3187-g53b86cac7e77ddff4e8a215408f7331ebc5bf22c
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116480
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
--- Comment #7 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> For portability you likely want to convert the function pointer to uintptr_t
> and only that to char */long *. That might also avoid GCCs diagnostic.
Thanks fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116485
Bug ID: 116485
Summary: CFG cleanup should prune unreachable switch cases
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116485
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Note the real issue is that debug temp insertion cannot handle the situation
at all where we remove stmts in the wrong order, thus removing a stmt
which has uses that are released.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener ---
Note we do have ad-hoc code in insert_debug_temp_for_var_def dealing with such
situations, but it doesn't trigger here because there is dominator info
available used as indicator that SSA form is up-to-dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> Created attachment 58991
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58991&action=edit
> proposed patch
>
> I would appreciate wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
Unfortunately the following doesn't reproduce the issue.
#include
#include
void g();
void f(int nBands, double maxZErr) {
for (int iBand = 0; iBand < nBands; iBand++)
{
g();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
--- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > But for satisfying some tools analyzing the generated machine code
>
> Also this sounds like a limitation in the tool analyzing the generated code
> and outside o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
I.e. we want to refer the exact location of the jump instruction (not an
instruction preparing for it) in the asm, and doing so is not possible with
computed goto.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116348
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3e71b99194bff878d3bf3b35f9528a350d10df9
commit r15-3189-gd3e71b99194bff878d3bf3b35f9528a350d10df9
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Thu Aug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116348
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --enable-libsanitizer
--disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r15-3187-20240826023505-g53b86cac7e7-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.0 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105483
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ceeb9926d69dbb382622a8eae9eef7ed8ac3e97
commit r15-3191-g0ceeb9926d69dbb382622a8eae9eef7ed8ac3e97
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104845
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116466
--- Comment #4 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=116486
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116458
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Bernd Edlinger :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eb63f9580f0220e347034ef337dbc93d12931d6c
commit r15-3193-geb63f9580f0220e347034ef337dbc93d12931d6c
Author: Bernd Edlinger
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116466
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hmm, I don't know why I can't change the status to fixed...
Feel free to close this ticket.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
--- Comment #15 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #14)
> Hmm, I don't know why I can't change the status to fixed...
> Feel free to close this ticket.
Please change your email on BZ to match your @gcc.gnu.org email to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116466
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Created attachment 59003
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59003&action=edit
Hack from the RAU team
Attached is the hack from the RAU team.
It was initially used to help identify cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116470
--- Comment #17 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #12)
> (thanks), but on Solaris/sparc there's
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/inline7.c scan-assembler DW_AT_ranges
>
> both with as and gas.
Hmm,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116467
--- Comment #2 from rsaxvc at gmail dot com ---
I had wondered about that too but hadn't been able to find anything about it.
User ccrause on esp32.com knew where it was though. From
https://www.cadence.com/content/dam/cadence-www/global/en_US/do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116460
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
> Unfortunately the following doesn't reproduce the issue.
>
> #include
> #include
>
> void g();
>
> void f(int nBands, double maxZErr) {
> for (int i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116485
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116483
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6)
> with the caveats that you'd only get that for future gcc releases
I think this caveat is fine as if adding the other feature to asm goto you
would also have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116486
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116486
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115716
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Simon Martin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26ee954476bef7328d2cf45928c3c9b84df77178
commit r15-3195-g26ee954476bef7328d2cf45928c3c9b84df77178
Author: Simon Martin
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115716
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.5|15.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116462
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
rc & 1)
crc = crc >> 1 ^ k;
else
crc >>= 1;
c[i] = crc;
}
b();
l(a, "", bx);
m(d ^ 2, bx);
}
```
It can also be found in https://godbolt.org/z/sscqo3GqP
My gcc version is gcc version 15.0.0 20240826 (experimental) (GCC).
I built this with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116487
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115408
--- Comment #14 from gagan sidhu (broly) ---
any update herE?
pinski i saw you push a commit a month or two ago with respect to multilib
darwin builds, but i couldn't find it in the github since i forgot where
exactly it was.
i want to try put
h: ../gcc-trunk/configure --disable-bootstrap
--enable-checking=yes --prefix=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-sanitizers --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240826 (experiment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116488
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |15.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116488
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116489
Bug ID: 116489
Summary: Conflict between noinit and section __attribute__
makes object files (and static libraries)
unnecessarily large
Product: gcc
Version: 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114224
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Interesting:
> ```
> int h1(unsigned a)
> {
> return __builtin_popcountg(a) == 1;
> }
> ```
> works.
>
>
> Anyways I will be adding POPCOUNT's rtl cos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116489
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116489
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>In any case, the behavior seems to be undocumented:
Well considering the documentation says:
place sections with the .noinit prefix
you can assume they conflict :).
Also "prefix" is almost always added w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I looked at this one again, also at the fortran-dump.
Consider:
subroutine s1
intrinsic :: atan
real :: r = 1.
print *, atan (-1.d0,r)
end
subroutine s2
external :: atan
real :: r = 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116359
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116490
Bug ID: 116490
Summary: Crash in explicitly instantiated Function Contracts
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116128
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Guided by the dump-tree for the inlining code, I played a little to see
what kind of code the middle-end expects. To this end I used C code.
The reference for the sum over a rank-1 array (given
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
Bug ID: 116491
Summary: GCC defines macro linux if -std is not set, and does
not define otherwise
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #1 from Sergey Markelov ---
Expected: GCC should not define the undocumented/non standard macro `linux`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65128
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sergio_nsk at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84400
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65128
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mihaipop11 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #3 from Sergey Markelov ---
This is not a duplicate. The macro is defined conditionally, this is not a
correct behavior.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sergey Markelov from comment #3)
> This is not a duplicate. The macro is defined conditionally, this is not a
> correct behavior.
Yes it is. Please read that one and pr84400 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Specifically https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84400#c2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sergey Markelov from comment #3)
> This is not a duplicate. The macro is defined conditionally, this is not a
> correct behavior.
Yes and that is by design. -std=gnu++17 enables some non-standa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116359
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116491
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or rather see
https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/prop_tgt/CXX_EXTENSIONS.html#prop_tgt:CXX_EXTENSIONS
.
That is -std=c++17 vs -std=gnu++17. GCC defaults to gnu++17 in newer versions
of GCC.
So the bug is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #201 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 59006
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59006&action=edit
Diff for bootstrap comparison failure of gcc/gimple-lower-bitint.c
(In reply to John Paul Adrian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116492
Bug ID: 116492
Summary: inherited constructors in subclass of std::expected
can not be overridden
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #202 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Adding "gcc/gimple-lower-bitint*" to "compare_exclusions" in configure.ac makes
the build pass the bootstrap comparison and completely succeed with LRA enabled
with the following patches applied
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116492
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-26
Summary|inherited
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116492
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>The same does not happen in clang, and in gcc with similar examples from other
>classes I have tried.
So it comes down to the concept on the constructor which is why you didn't run
into similar examples f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116492
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Slightly reduced:
In this example if you comment out:
```
requires true_c
```
GCC does the correct thing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115858
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Arsen Arsenovic :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c73d7f3c66c0b5865edd6880cd0d6be723cfbb8d
commit r15-3202-gc73d7f3c66c0b5865edd6880cd0d6be723cfbb8d
Author: Arsen ArsenoviÄ
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113457
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Arsen Arsenovic :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5cca7517c5868b7b9aa13992145eb6082ac5d5b9
commit r15-3203-g5cca7517c5868b7b9aa13992145eb6082ac5d5b9
Author: Arsen ArsenoviÄ
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115883
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5031df5d1f4954304c618efd2de029edc6b3699f
commit r15-3204-g5031df5d1f4954304c618efd2de029edc6b3699f
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116493
Bug ID: 116493
Summary: widening reduction add could be better
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116493
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Forgot to mention this is at -O2 (or -O3).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116441
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85973
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||leonid.satanovsky at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110980
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98608342932e8951a4c8db3e9df79f9187424d53
commit r15-3206-g98608342932e8951a4c8db3e9df79f9187424d53
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99243
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:215ff991a8681f968823b913e1c79a32d339c097
commit r15-3207-g215ff991a8681f968823b913e1c79a32d339c097
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
