https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105486
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
13.0
Known to work||13.0
Assignee|roger at nextmovesoftware dot com |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Roger Sayle ---
This has now been fixed on mainline.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83907
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83819
Bug 83819 depends on bug 83907, which changed state.
Bug 83907 Summary: missing strlen optimization for non-zero memset followed by
a nul byte store
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83907
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105613
--- Comment #5 from Roger Sayle ---
Firstly sorry for the inconvenience. Yep, Jakub's analysis is correct we/I
need iorv4si for NE. My thinko, X==Y is X.h==Y.h && X.l==Y.l, but X!=Y is
X.h!=Y.h || X.l!=Y.l, sorry. Many thanks to Jakub for ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105668
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #5 from Roger Sayle ---
Patches proposed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595382.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595383.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105668
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|roger at nextmovesoftware dot com |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99405
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from Roger Sayle ---
This is now fully optimized at the tree level too.
int f (int i, unsigned int n)
{
int result;
int _1;
[local count: 118111600]:
_1 = (int) n_3(D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98865
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Roger Sayle ---
I believe this would be fixed by:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595382.html
but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105791
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Doh! V1TI needs to be added to V_128_256. I'll spin a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105835
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70321
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
|--- |13.0
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Roger Sayle ---
This should now be fixed (for x86) on mainline.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105791
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105830
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Patch proposed
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596200.html
|expr.cc:4011|emit_move_insn, at
||expr.cc:4011
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
|P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105853
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
Patch proposed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596242.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105856
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
Patch proposed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596242.html
|1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #1 from Roger Sayle ---
I believe this is resolved by the patch proposed here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105874
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
||2022-06-07
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
I believe I have a fix (that should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105874
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96442
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105874
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105866
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Hi Joseph. Sorry again for the breakage. Hopefully, the
load_register_parameters ICE is now resolved. Can you confirm that glibc now
builds without problems on MIPS?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105853
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105856
--- Comment #6 from Roger Sayle ---
Hi David. Thanks again for all your help (building Linux distributions is a
helpful/vital service to the GCC community). Can you confirm that this problem
is now fixed on ARM?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105856
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95126
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.4|13.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101926
Bug 101926 depends on bug 95126, which changed state.
Bug 95126 Summary: [10/11/12/13 Regression] Missed opportunity to turn static
variables into immediates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95126
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105930
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
||2022-06-16
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Roger Sayle ---
The following patch appears to correct this for
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #5 from Roger Sayle ---
Patch proposed: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596778.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105835
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
|--- |12.0
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Comment #6 from Roger Sayle ---
This is now fixed on mainline (and GCC 12).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105991
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Mine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106122
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94026
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100694
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |11.4
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Comment #8 from Roger Sayle ---
As explained by Hongtao in comment #6, this is now fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105930
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106278
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106273
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106303
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Grr... This problem is at (currently just beyond) the limits of my abilities.
The TImode STV pass uses data flow to split conversion opportunities up into
chains, effectively performing live range splitting,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106303
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
I think the solution may be similar/related to Richard Biener's fix for PR
target/91522.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106264
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106278
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106273
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
This should now be fixed on mainline (for GCC 13). Unfortunately, this issue
is subtly different to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106347
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
No, it's not PR 106278 that this PR is similar to (which concerned REG_EQUAL
notes and is now fixed), but PR 106303 (which concerns STV converting some
mentions of a TImode register/memory, and not others, due
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106264
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
--- Comment #12 from Roger Sayle ---
Fixed on mainline thanks to Jakub's patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40210
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96392
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
Testing a fix. Sorry for the inconvenience. An even more reduced test case is:
unsigned int foo (unsigned int a)
{
unsigned int u;
/* b == 0x8000 */
unsigned short b = __builtin_bswap16 (a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101642
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100810
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
I believe this bug occurs during the .195t.ccp4 pass that was introduced by the
commit identified above, where tree-ssa-propagate.c's
substitute_and_fold_engine appears not to correctly handle the situation of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101403
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102029
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102031
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77980
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113764
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113832
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113673
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
The identified patch implements += the same way as |=. Presumably a version of
the test case replacing "m += *data++;" with "m |= *data++;" would be more
useful at identifying a patch that actually changed EH
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113764
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Investigating further, the thinking behind GCC's current behaviour can be found
in Agner Fog's instruction tables; on many architectures BSR is much slower
than LZCNT.
Legacy AMD: BSR=4 cycles, LZCNT=2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113764
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[X86] Generates lzcnt when |[X86] __builtin_clz
|bs
|1
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-15
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
The issue appears to be with (poor costing in) loop invariant store motion.
Adding the command line
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113690
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] ICE: in |[13 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111267
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106060
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
--- Comment #5 from Roger Sayle ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113336
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114187
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-01
Status|UNCONFIRMED
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
Created attachment 57587
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57587&action=edit
proposed patch
Proposed fix attached. Currently bootstrapping and regression testing. The
prob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114284
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114552
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110588
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110699
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
|RESOLVED
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
This issue has been fixed on mainline (for GCC 14), by the patch for PR 110699.
|--- |FIXED
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Comment #4 from Roger Sayle ---
This issue has been fixed on mainline (for GCC 14), by the patch for PR 110699.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110787
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110587
--- Comment #15 from Roger Sayle ---
Hi Richard,
There's another patch awaiting review at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/625282.html
and I've another follow-up after that currently regression testing...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110790
--- Comment #5 from Roger Sayle ---
I'll add this testcase to the testsuite, when I apply a corrected version of my
QImode offset patch to mainline. On the bright side, we'll be generating more
efficient code for gmp's refmpn_tstbit by using th
at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
--- Comment #11 from Roger Sayle ---
Mine. Alas the obvious fix of adding an early clobber to the rotate doubleword
from memory alternative generates some truly terrible code (spills via memory
to SSE registers!?), but I've come up w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110701
--- Comment #7 from Roger Sayle ---
Patch proposed here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/625532.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110587
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|roger at nextmovesoftware dot com |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |roger at
nextmovesoftware dot com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2023-07-28
--- Comment #1 from Roger Sayle ---
My STV
|RESOLVED
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
--- Comment #3 from Roger Sayle ---
This was fixed by Hongtao's patch for GCC 13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104914
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43892
--- Comment #39 from Roger Sayle ---
My apologies for dropping the ball on this patch (series)... My only access to
PowerPC hardware is/was via the GCC compile farm, which complicates things.
Shortly after David's approval, Segher enquired wheth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83409
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
|--- |8.4
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #6 from Roger Sayle ---
As reported by Giulio, this bug has now been fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91251
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71749
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111519
--- Comment #2 from Roger Sayle ---
Complicated. Things have gone wrong before the strlen pass which is given:
_73 = e;
_72 = *_73;
...
*_73 = prephitmp_23;
d = _72;
Here the assignment to *_73 overwrites the value of f (at *e) which
201 - 300 of 427 matches
Mail list logo
