[Bug c/106609] New: [SH] miscompilation of loop involving noreturn call

2022-08-13 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 Bug ID: 106609 Summary: [SH] miscompilation of loop involving noreturn call Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug middle-end/106609] [SH] miscompilation of loop involving noreturn call

2022-08-15 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 --- Comment #2 from Sébastien Michelland --- Yes there are delay slots for all branches except bt and bf, so here bt.s, jsr and rts all have one. (-fno-delayed-branches avoids them but that doesn't affect the bad optimization in this case.) Add

[Bug target/106609] [SH] miscompilation due to incorrect elimination of comparisons to 0

2022-08-16 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 Sébastien Michelland changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[SH] miscompilation of loop |[SH] miscompilation due to

[Bug target/106609] [SH] miscompilation due to incorrect elimination of comparisons to 0

2022-08-16 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 --- Comment #5 from Sébastien Michelland --- > Then this is a target specific issue until provided otherwise. mach stands > for machine (target) specific pass. That makes a lot of sense, thanks. I found a much simpler example exhibiting the b

[Bug target/106609] [SH] miscompilation due to incorrect elimination of comparisons to 0

2022-08-17 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 --- Comment #6 from Sébastien Michelland --- First bad commit is r12-1955-ga86b3453fc6e29cf0e19916b01c393652d838d56, though I don't know what path is taken from there to the incorrect rewrite.

[Bug target/106609] [12 Regression] sh3eb-elf cross compiler is being miscompiled since r12-1525-g3155d51bfd1de8b6c4645

2022-11-24 Thread sebastien.michelland--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106609 --- Comment #15 from Sébastien Michelland --- Thanks, turns out my bisected commit was related after all... I can confirm that test cases from OP and #4 (with protocol from OP) are no longer broken for me on yesterday's master.