https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #375 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #374)
> Created attachment 59286 [details]
> a patch for c#367
>
> We use movsf_ie as a fall-back for for moving fp-reg from/to multiword
> subreg in 59190. Looks thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116884
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Using the result (https://godbolt.org/z/WexxTdc1W) also confuses things, e.g.
__builtin_printf("end=%s\n", l); and it goes away.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46820
--- Comment #16 from Sam James ---
* https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/87o744ctuk@gentoo.org/
* https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/Zv0oPknQT0Nq4Blu@tucnak/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61487
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #376 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #374)
> Created attachment 59286 [details]
> a patch for c#367
>
> We use movsf_ie as a fall-back for for moving fp-reg from/to multiword
> subreg in 59190. Looks thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #377 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #376)
> Alternative #2 above is the same as alternative #13 of the "movsf_ie"
> pattern, isn't it?
> .. which is also the same as "movsf_ie_y" and that dangling 'define
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #373 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 59285
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59285&action=edit
a reduced test case for c#367
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #374 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 59286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59286&action=edit
a patch for c#367
We use movsf_ie as a fall-back for for moving fp-reg from/to multiword subreg
in 59190.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116984
Kees Cook changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116884
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116933
--- Comment #15 from Sam James ---
Thank you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
--- Comment #26 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Gerald Pfeifer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c86be8f605a308e6429bf00d870aaf6406032ab3
commit r15-4091-gc86be8f605a308e6429bf00d870aaf6406032ab3
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116553
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=116988
Bug ID: 116988
Summary: Documentation for local register variables with
inline-asm could have better example
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Key
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116985
Bug ID: 116985
Summary: [15 Regression] ICE in vectorizer with
--param=vect-partial-vector-usage=2 -mavx512vbmi2
since r15-2097-gdb3c8c9726d0ba
Product: gcc
Vers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116985
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116945
--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard ---
Re comment #4. Sam reports that --expensive-definedness-checks=yes doesn't work
in this case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116989
Bug ID: 116989
Summary: __builtin_clz{,g}/__builtin_ctz{,g} documentation for
0 should be clearer
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: docu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116989
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note UBSan already treats it as undefined behavior rather than the result being
undefined.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116984
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Kees Cook from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > I don't think so since &p->array[negative] is undefined behavior even inside
> > a dynamic boz.
>
> Without counted_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116984
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111055
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116987
Bug ID: 116987
Summary: Internal error checking coroutine final suspend self
reference
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116986
Bug ID: 116986
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr115387-2.c -O0 (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116933
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a8e6360765336969e3f45ac16e4340e5e5468768
commit r15-4085-ga8e6360765336969e3f45ac16e4340e5e5468768
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111055
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The adapters are trivial, so I've done them too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116933
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116987
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116987
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
can you attach the preprocessed source as mentioned on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ ?
29 matches
Mail list logo
