https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116814
--- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The change fixed libjack2-1.9.22 for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116847
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116848
Bug ID: 116848
Summary: Check to see if is_maybe_undefined can be replaced
with ssa_name_maybe_undef_p/mark_ssa_maybe_undefs in
loop unrolling
Product: gcc
Versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116848
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
Problem happens in 14.2.0, 13.2.0, 12.2.0
Doesn't seem to happen in 10.2.0 or 11.2.0
Only seems to happen for -std=c++17/14/11, but not for c++20/23/26.
Only seems to happen for -O2, but not -O0 / -O1 / -O3.
Happens for vector, but not deque or list.
Happens for vector, but not vector.
Doesn't happ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116851
Bug ID: 116851
Summary: vector assignment compilation fails claiming
null STL argument
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116850
Bug ID: 116850
Summary: ICE at -O{s,2,3} on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
verify_dominators, at dominance.cc:1194
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
Summary|ICE at -O{s,2,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116851
--- Comment #1 from Jason Mancini ---
Forgot to mention platform: x86-64 running RedHat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
It is definitely ilp32 related but maybe a missed optimization there. And might
be a missed optimization for lp64 when using long too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
LLP64 might need to use long long though to get the same failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116754
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
It remains open for backporting to 13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116847
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
s/not trying/now trying/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112341
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Arsen Ars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69765
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo ---
Tried this case on GCC-15 branch
https://github.com/olegendo/gcc/tree/devel/sh-lra and it seems to be not a
problem anymore, regardless of LRA or no LRA usage. Should be added as a test
case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106167
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116844
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
using T = void ();
T a = delete ("hello");
T b = delete;
```
Should be valid, correct?
I was even more super confused because clang parses `= delete` here specially
and then errors out:
```
:3:7: erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116844
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Alias||cwg2144
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116847
Bug ID: 116847
Summary: [15 regression] r15-3859-g63a598deb0c9fc causes many
excess errors
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116791
--- Comment #12 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The change fixed libvpx build for me. Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|13.3.1 |15.0
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
Nat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116849
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||sh*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116849
Bug ID: 116849
Summary: [SH] Redundant fp mode switch at function entry
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116709
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
La
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116847
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
For LP64 (including using long), fre1 is able to optimize it.
ILP32 (with long rather than int):
```
k_12 = j_11(D) + -1;
j.0_1 = (sizetype) j_11(D);
_2 = j.0_1 + 1073741823;
_3 = _2 * 4;
_4 = a_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116852
Bug ID: 116852
Summary: -fvisibility-inlines-hidden does not hide template
functions without 'inline'
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116831
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Full dump in the end:
Applying pattern match.pd:5354, gimple-match-3.cc:2427
Applying pattern match.pd:6669, gimple-match-3.cc:2452
gimple_simplified to _203 = vect_cst__182 % vect_cst__183;
mask__9.16_189 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116831
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
> I'm not sure why that's created
That reminds me the -folding option to the dump option is not documented (PR
114892) but if you use -all, you would have gotten the dump where it says was
gimple_simplifi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116831
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 59196
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59196&action=edit
diff-test.txt: avr testsuite delta
(In reply to denisc from comment #2)
> Johan can you test the patch ?
On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
Bug ID: 116846
Summary: g++.dg/modules/indirect-1_b.C fails
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: testsuite-fail
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
--- Comment #13 from Arsen Arsenović ---
I realized there were preprocessed full sources attached to the bug and tested
those also. they did not ICE, so I will send the patch (though I'd still
appreciate seeing results from large programs and t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #330 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #325)
>
> Our movsf logic for LRA doesn't handle these well. If these reg from/to
> subreg of SImode move is splitted with fpul, it will cause some very bad
> code or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67732
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:064d5c67d7ad2be446c19e84f0cd993ecab784c3
commit r15-3884-g064d5c67d7ad2be446c19e84f0cd993ecab784c3
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91826
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
commit r15-3878-gd5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
Author: Sam James
Date: Wed Jul 31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fee826bc1bbd4016d5b79e16e642d68c4007b09
commit r15-3879-g6fee826bc1bbd4016d5b79e16e642d68c4007b09
Author: Sam James
Date: Wed Sep 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30161
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
commit r15-3878-gd5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
Author: Sam James
Date: Wed Jul 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116846
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
commit r15-3878-gd5864b95ce94d9d480a70ffd6e2e4a5f45dc75ed
Author: Sam James
Date: Wed Jul 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116701
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14cd10815a39cc131662d4b6759ff6712ddd0b6d
commit r15-3880-g14cd10815a39cc131662d4b6759ff6712ddd0b6d
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70989
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Summary|gcc.dg/pr109393.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #52 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, aldy at quesejoda dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
>
> --- Comment #51 from aldy at quesejoda dot com ---
> "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
"rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
>
> --- Comment #50 from Richard Biener ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
>> Trunk at -O1:
>>
>> dominator optimization : 495.14 ( 82%) 0.20 ( 5%) 495.44 (
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #51 from aldy at quesejoda dot com ---
"rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs" writes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
>
> --- Comment #50 from Richard Biener ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #53 from aldy at quesejoda dot com ---
rguenther at suse dot de via Gcc-bugs writes:
>> Have you tried the patch in comment 22? That should reduce the time in
>> DOM by 23%.
>
> I thought that was already applied ...?
No. I want
rguenther at suse dot de via Gcc-bugs writes:
>> Have you tried the patch in comment 22? That should reduce the time in
>> DOM by 23%.
>
> I thought that was already applied ...?
No. I wanted to investigate the 3 missing threads, but I think the
patch can go in as is. I'll be away for a few
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116078
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> or rather the order of some operations for the arguments cause some other
> missing optimizations.
>
> I doubt there is not much to be done from the front-end sid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #50 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Trunk at -O1:
>
> dominator optimization : 495.14 ( 82%) 0.20 ( 5%) 495.44 (
> 81%) 113M ( 5%)
Compared to that we're now at the following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116838
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jamaika from comment #2)
> I don't know who's to blame.
If you enable C++20 (or C++23) and GCC tells you that your code is not
compatible with C++20, fix the code.
(In reply to Jamaika from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Found a testcase which we produce wrong code as we introduce an
> unconditional load:
> ```
> extern int a __attribute__((weak));
>
> int b;
> int bar (int c) _
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #27 from Chris Jones ---
> Certainly, this is more about Xcode, not CLT.
Not quite true, certainly not within MacPorts. See below.
>
> > > > So, the solutions that work are:
> > > >
> > > > 1. when building for macOS 14, use the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #329 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #326)
> Created attachment 59190 [details]
> a quick fix for c#318
>
> This also reverts the change in c#312 and gives another fix for that issue.
> Tested only with t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe ---
Folks - we all want ponies...
... but remember this is a toolchain - it is quite complex; expecting any
random permutation of things that you happen to choose to DTRT will probably
disappoint you.
Xcode doe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116025
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #1)
> Thomas, shall we close this one?
It's not yet complete. A few intrinsics are still missing, and
I also want to get C interop up and running.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116822
Edwin Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116585
--- Comment #5 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Fixed on trunk sofar.
thanks a lot for fixing this so quick.
Will this patch be backported to older releases?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #26 from Mark Mentovai ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #25)
> 1. but you have identified that this cannot work when symbols are removed
> from
> a library .. as we see here
Apple never really removes symbols that were ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|phiprop will prop back into |[12/13/14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116845
Bug ID: 116845
Summary: pr109393.c test fails
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #29 from Chris Jones ---
Iains, I was not trying to suggest with my last post what you should support,
that is entirely up to you and we are very grateful for what you do do.
I was simply trying to expand on (and correct a bit) som
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101831
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:82d97278cc3adae40a13eef9ae6f339f87d1f8f6
commit r15-3873-g82d97278cc3adae40a13eef9ae6f339f87d1f8f6
Author: Sam James
Date: Fri Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
The case where we want still do it on the back edge is something like:
```
int a;
int b;
int bar (int c) __attribute__((noipa, noinline));
int
bar (int c)
{
int *p = &a;
for (int j = 0; j < *p; ++j)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116839
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c79cc30862d7255ca15884aa956d1ccfa279d86a
commit r15-3875-gc79cc30862d7255ca15884aa956d1ccfa279d86a
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Wed Sep 25 16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
Or maybe for back edges, only handle the case where the phi and the use are in
the same BB if we are going to add a new phi, if we are going to reuse the phi
then we can just use that.
Let me program that u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116843
Bug ID: 116843
Summary: Native platform wait on Windows
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #25 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Mark Mentovai from comment #24)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #23)
> > OK. I don't want to argue about the details / usability etc. etc. ( but note
> > that __symbols are for the implem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109688
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That fixed the fmt::formatter::format function, and this fixed the
std::formatter::format function:
https://github.com/gabime/spdlog/commit/3cd06a3d40cd9054cbc997fe6e28c5a472b93b8c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107886
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #24 from Mark Mentovai ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #23)
> OK. I don't want to argue about the details / usability etc. etc. ( but note
> that __symbols are for the implementation and the compiler is part of the
> implem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116772
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70740
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d1e7f3a6c149b6fa058ce3083c36b8a5c404af5c
commit r15-3871-gd1e7f3a6c149b6fa058ce3083c36b8a5c404af5c
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116772
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6c5543d3d9c4bbcd19f0ae2b7ed7e523c978a9a8
commit r15-3870-g6c5543d3d9c4bbcd19f0ae2b7ed7e523c978a9a8
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116844
Bug ID: 116844
Summary: (cwg2876) - Disambiguation of T x = delete("text")
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116809
--- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Mark Mentovai from comment #22)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #21)
> > Thta is quite surprising - since the SDK should reflect the symbols exported
> > by the libraries installed on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #48 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caf3fe7880e62692da45489dc5bcae069c1555c8
commit r15-3852-gcaf3fe7880e62692da45489dc5bcae069c1555c8
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114855
--- Comment #49 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc141b56b367b3d81c1b590e22ae174f1e013009
commit r15-3854-gcc141b56b367b3d81c1b590e22ae174f1e013009
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.gentoo.org/sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #328 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #326)
> Created attachment 59190 [details]
> a quick fix for c#318
>
> This also reverts the change in c#312 and gives another fix for that issue.
> Te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116841
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.3
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, back to the drawing board on the patch for this one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109393
Christoph Müllner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cmuellner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116840
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The other option is at isel time detect popcount & 1 and do similar tricks as
popcount <=/== 1 and at expand see which cost is better. Though popcount rtx
cost is wrong in the aarch64 backend.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109688
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109688
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/gabime/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116835
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Phiprop use commit on the edge, maybe that could be improved/changed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116838
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes please stop using GCC bugzilla to ask questions about broken code, e.g. Bug
116432 and Bug 109599 and Bug 116434
And "this code doesn't compile" or "my code has warnings" is not a bug either,
e.g. Bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114326
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Philipp Tomsich :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a88d6c6d777ad7c9235e2e620318f26e5347e50a
commit r15-3866-ga88d6c6d777ad7c9235e2e620318f26e5347e50a
Author: Konstantinos Eleftheri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114326
Christoph Müllner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cmuellner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116842
Bug ID: 116842
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE definition in block follows the
use
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116842
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
