https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109279
--- Comment #11 from Vineet Gupta ---
With change suggested by @pinksia, I do see that in split1,
riscv_move_integer() -> riscv_split_integer() is now called.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109279
--- Comment #13 from Vineet Gupta ---
Ok it seems I missed _some_ improvement with prev change, although not ideal
still.
With 2e886eef7f2b
li a0,0x0101_
addia0,a0,0x0101
sllia0,a0,16
addia0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
--- Comment #6 from Jeremy R. ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109279
--- Comment #14 from Vineet Gupta ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> Here is something to look into:
> #define const1 0x0101010101010101ULL
> #define const0 const1
> unsigned long long f(unsigned long long occ, const unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109683
Bug ID: 109683
Summary: [13/14 Regression] False cyclic dependency error
reported for constraint
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109727
Bug ID: 109727
Summary: [13/14 Regression] -Warray-bounds false positive with
-fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114784
Bug ID: 114784
Summary: [14 Regression] Inlining fails for always_inline
inheriting constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114784
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Bertalan ---
Forgot to actually post the error message itself:
In constructor 'ErrorOr::ErrorOr(int)',
inlined from 'ErrorOr run()' at :29:10,
inlined from 'int serenity_main()' at :32:8:
:13:39: error: inlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114784
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Bertalan ---
I tried Jakub's patch (thank you for the super quick response!), it crashes if
the constructor has non-type template parameters:
template struct SpanImpl {
template SpanImpl();
};
template struct Sp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114854
Bug ID: 114854
Summary: [14 Regression] ICE with default initializer of const
reference member at cp/cp-gimplify.cc:900
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
Bug ID: 115201
Summary: Recursive binary search is incorrectly inlined
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #2 from Jeremy R. ---
Does recursive inlining here interfere with TCO, or is GCC just not able to TCO
in this case?
I can understand why some bounded recursive inlining may be desirable, however
in this case it seems very not ideal.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115235
Bug ID: 115235
Summary: Non-standard .debug_addr section
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115235
--- Comment #1 from Jeremy R. ---
Ope, my bad, it appears the section is generated properly with -gsplit-dwarf
-gdwarf-5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115235
--- Comment #3 from Jeremy R. ---
Hi, can you clarify what you mean? Why does -gsplit-dwarf without -gdwarf-5
emit in debug fission with extended dwarf-4 if it's specifically dealing with
dwarf 5?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115313
Bug ID: 115313
Summary: False positive -fanalyzer use of uninitialized value
due to std::string's default constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115313
--- Comment #1 from Jeremy R. ---
Reduced:
#include
std::string foo() {
std::string str;
return str;
}
: In function 'std::string foo()':
:4:17: warning: use of uninitialized value '' [CWE-457]
[-Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110203
Bug ID: 110203
Summary: Sum should optimize to closed form
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110203
--- Comment #2 from Jeremy R. ---
I wasn't able to get this to work with unsigned either
https://godbolt.org/z/bGcW7ebjd but maybe there's some other way to trigger
this optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110203
--- Comment #4 from Jeremy R. ---
Thanks for tracking down the duplicates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113392
Bug ID: 113392
Summary: Missed fold of loading 8 consecutive bytes leading to
a missed byteswap optimization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117217
Bug ID: 117217
Summary: ICE in tree-sra when copying struct with a union of
packed structs with bitfields
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117217
--- Comment #1 from Jeremy R. ---
This ICEs on trunk without [[gnu::packed]]:
struct a {
int b;
long c;
long d;
bool f;
};
struct g {
int b;
long c;
long d;
bool : 1;
} h;
struct l {
union i {
a j;
g k;
i(g m) : k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118147
Bug ID: 118147
Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic push causes errors when used in
IILE in struct member initializer
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101587
Jonathan Müller changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at jonathanmueller dot dev
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118670
Bug ID: 118670
Summary: -Wdangling-reference false positive when returning a
reference from a reference_wrapper
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118670
Jeremy R. changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Jeremy R. ---
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119294
Bug ID: 119294
Summary: Strange (buggy?) codegen when passing cleared vector
as argument
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Bug ID: 119103
Summary: Very suboptimal AVX2 code generation of simple shift
loop
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #12 from Niklas Haas ---
Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
versions of GCC to compile the right thing, but without breaking cross-platform
compatibility?
I did try replacing the assertion by "x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #16 from Niklas Haas ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #15)
> (In reply to Niklas Haas from comment #12)
> > Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
> > versions of GCC to compile the ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #1 from Niklas Haas ---
Clang's output for comparison:
lshift:
vmovdqu ymm0, ymmword ptr [rdi]
vmovd xmm1, esi
vpsllw ymm0, ymm0, xmm1
vmovdqu ymmword ptr [rdi], ymm0
vzeroupper
ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82134
Jeremy R. changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||llvm at rifkin dot dev
--- Comment #7 from J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
Bug ID: 120475
Summary: vector is 60x slower with ASan
detect_stack_use_after_return=1
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120475
Daniel Bertalan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
101 - 135 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
