http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47534
--- Comment #1 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-07 20:00:14 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Mon Feb 7 20:00:08 2011
New Revision: 169896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169896
Log:
PR target/47534
* co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42240
--- Comment #20 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-27 08:36:58 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Sun Feb 27 08:36:55 2011
New Revision: 170534
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170534
Log:
2011-02-22 Georg-Johann Lay
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45261
--- Comment #16 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-27 12:23:22 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Sun Feb 27 12:23:14 2011
New Revision: 170536
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170536
Log:
2011-02-23 Georg-Johann Lay
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45261
--- Comment #17 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-28 17:13:16 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Mon Feb 28 17:13:13 2011
New Revision: 170569
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170569
Log:
2011-02-28 Georg-Jo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42240
--- Comment #21 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-03 16:58:34 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Thu Mar 3 16:58:26 2011
New Revision: 170657
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170657
Log:
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
denisc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50775
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-15 16:35:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 25829
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25829
RA dump
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
denisc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #11 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-05 19:08:41 UTC ---
Sorry, wrong button was pressed.
(In reply to comment #8)
> I'm not going to be able to look at it anytime soon, but just some general
> thoughts:
I think tha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #12 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-05 19:15:11 UTC ---
This is a very old bug:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42204
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00783.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #13 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-06 18:42:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 26008
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26008
Simplified testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #14 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-12 18:30:00 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Thu Jan 12 18:29:54 2012
New Revision: 183136
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183136
Log:
PR target/50925
* co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #15 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-14 18:11:33 UTC ---
Author: denisc
Date: Sat Jan 14 18:11:29 2012
New Revision: 183183
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=183183
Log:
PR target/50925
* co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50925
--- Comment #18 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-28 10:05:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Assuming there is a connexion between these two issues.
>
> If that assumption turns out to be wrong, please cut the dependency.
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84209
--- Comment #2 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Wed Feb 7 09:59:52 2018
New Revision: 257440
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257440&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84209
* config/a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84209
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Wed Mar 7 09:13:12 2018
New Revision: 258315
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258315&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2018-02-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71103
--- Comment #2 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Sat May 21 10:47:27 2016
New Revision: 236558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71103
* config/av
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67353
--- Comment #2 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Wed Jun 15 16:40:07 2016
New Revision: 237486
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237486&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67353
* config/a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67353
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Wed Jun 15 16:43:35 2016
New Revision: 237487
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237487&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Correct Changelog entry:
PR targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60991
--- Comment #4 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Mon May 12 15:33:00 2014
New Revision: 210325
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210325&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
PR target/60991
* config/a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60991
--- Comment #5 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Mon May 12 15:57:52 2014
New Revision: 210327
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210327&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-12 Senth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60991
--- Comment #6 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Mon May 12 16:07:44 2014
New Revision: 210328
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210328&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2014-05-12 Senth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65210
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Fri Sep 4 16:34:11 2015
New Revision: 227496
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227496&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
PR target/65210
* co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67839
--- Comment #2 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Wed Oct 28 17:35:27 2015
New Revision: 229495
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229495&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog
PR target/67839
* co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58655
--- Comment #1 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: denisc
Date: Tue Jun 28 17:56:37 2016
New Revision: 237825
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237825&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/58655
* config/avr/avr.opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #15 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> Yeah :-) So post an actual patch, to gcc-patches@? :-)
PING ...
I sent a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #18 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #17)
> (In reply to denisc from comment #15)
> > I sent a patch.
>
> What might help is to CC the respective maintainer as listed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #2 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Comment on attachment 59393
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59393
Simplified testcase
void
f ()
{
volatile char c[0];
c[0] = 0;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
denisc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #4 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
After IRA we have:
---
;; bb 2 artificial_defs: { }
;; bb 2 artificial_uses: { u-1(28){ }u-1(32){ }u-1(34){ }}
;; lr in 28 [r28] 29 [r29] 32 [__SP_L__] 34
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #5 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #3)
> Maybe this one is related to the fact that LRA doesn't set strict when it is
> in strict-RTL mode? For example, with your lates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #6 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
At least, our main problem is that we have a frame pointer usage without frame
size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #7 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Clarification for simplified test case:
1. frame size is 0 (because a declaration of a local array has a zero size);
2. we have a local variable which can be addressable (althought it have a zero
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116780
--- Comment #11 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8)
> (In reply to denisc from comment #2)
> > Comment on attachment 59393 [details]
> > Simplified testcase
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #24 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #23)
> (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #22)
> > Unfortunately, one of them [lra-pr116550-2.c} is failing
> > with the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #14 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I sent a patch "[PATCH][LRA][PR116550] Reuse scratch registers generated by
LRA"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #4 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to denisc from comment #0)
> Created attachment 59370 [details]
> dse2 pass dump file
>
> Failed testcase:
> $ make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #9 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59576
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59576&action=edit
pro_and_epilogue pass dump file (pre dse2)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #10 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Proposed patch.
I just mark a CLOBBER insn with pseudo spilled to memory for removing it later
together with LRA temporary CLOBBER insns.
The patch is simple.
On x86_64, it bootstraps+regtests
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #7 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I'm sorry for the strange previous comment.
The right one.
Probably I found a bug.
The bug appears after the dse2 pass.
The dse2 pass removes necessary insns. (ie insn 554)
They are re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #6 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The patch:
(In reply to denisc from comment #4)
> (In reply to denisc from comment #0)
> > Created attachment 59370 [details]
> > dse2 pass dump file
> >
> > Fai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
--- Comment #8 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I forgot to add condition for "except those that refer to the return value"
The patch:
diff --git a/gcc/lra-spills.cc b/gcc/lra-spills.cc
index c149c3388cd..2f86ec0026c 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
denisc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #3 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59192
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59192&action=edit
LRA dump file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #4 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Explanation.
Test file: udivmoddi.c
problem insn: 484
Before LRA pass we have:
(insn 484 483 485 72 (parallel [
(set (reg/v:SI 143 [ __q1 ])
(plus:SI (reg/v:SI 143
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116550
--- Comment #10 from denisc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 59265
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59265&action=edit
Reduced test case
I have reduced the test case.
The bug in calculation of 'k = i &
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: avr
Created attachment 59370
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59370&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 117191, which changed state.
Bug 117191 Summary: [avr][dse2][lra] wrong dead store elimination
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117191
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
--- Comment #3 from Denis Chertykov ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #2)
> Created attachment 59602 [details]
> pr116781-gjl.diff
>
> (In reply to Denis Chertykov from comment #1)
> > Probably we have a wring definition of "*table
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116781
--- Comment #4 from Denis Chertykov ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #2)
> Created attachment 59602 [details]
> pr116781-gjl.diff
>
> (In reply to Denis Chertykov from comment #1)
> > Probably we have a wring definition of "*table
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||denisc at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
--- Comment #3 from Denis Chertykov ---
Created attachment 59796
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59796&action=edit
Modified test case "bf.c"
I worked with a modified test case (bf.c):
struct
{
unsigned long long u33 : 33
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
--- Comment #4 from Denis Chertykov ---
The bug appears in LRA after rematerialization pass while creating live ranges.
File lra.cc:
*
/* Now we know what pseudos should be spill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
--- Comment #5 from Denis Chertykov ---
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/670949.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 116778, which changed state.
Bug 116778 Summary: [lra][avr] Wrong code with -mlra (bitfld-lra.c)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 116778, which changed state.
Bug 116778 Summary: [lra][avr] Wrong code with -mlra (bitfld-lra.c)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
--- Comment #7 from Denis Chertykov ---
Committed a partial solution.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/671030.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116778
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
--- Comment #4 from Denis Chertykov ---
In brief:
this is an LRA bug derived from reuse spilling slots after frame pointer
spilling.
The slot was created for QImode (1 byte) and it was reused after spilling of
the
frame pointer for TImode regist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
--- Comment #1 from Denis Chertykov ---
Created attachment 60114
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60114&action=edit
Reduced test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
--- Comment #2 from Denis Chertykov ---
Created attachment 60115
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60115&action=edit
LRA dump file: simd-t.c.320r.reload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
--- Comment #3 from Denis Chertykov ---
Created attachment 60116
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60116&action=edit
IRA dump file: simd-t.c.319r.ira
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
Denis Chertykov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 117868, which changed state.
Bug 117868 Summary: [avr][lra] Wrong code with -mlra in simd-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113934
Bug 113934 depends on bug 117868, which changed state.
Bug 117868 Summary: [avr][lra] Wrong code with -mlra in simd-1.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117868
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118591
--- Comment #5 from Denis Chertykov ---
The patch is simple.
diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.cc b/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
index 7dbc7fe1e00..6c86e4f8f6c 100644
--- a/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
+++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.cc
@@ -5883,8 +5883,8 @@ stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118591
--- Comment #6 from Denis Chertykov ---
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/681478.html
71 matches
Mail list logo
