https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68879
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Dec 14 16:13:33 2015
New Revision: 231621
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231621&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix a mistake in cstore_si_as_di (PR68865, PR68879)
convert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68879
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Dec 14 16:13:33 2015
New Revision: 231621
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231621&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix a mistake in cstore_si_as_di (PR68865, PR68879)
convert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68865
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I cannot reproduce the problem with GCC 6, combine takes about 1%
time and little memory. I do not know what changed.
|rtl-optimization
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed, mine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candida
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68634
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candida
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 8 03:58:40 2016
New Revision: 232148
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232148&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
shrink-wrap: Once more PRs 67778, 68634, and now 68909
If a candid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69175
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68909
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69246
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The following patch does the trick, if having REG_ARGS_SIZE on sibcalls
is correct that is. I couldn't find any documentation on REG_ARGS_SIZE.
--- 8< ---
diff --git a/gcc/combine.c b/gcc/combine.c
ind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Do 4.9.2 and 5.3.0 actually fail the testcase? Huh?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jan 14 19:24:28 2016
New Revision: 232380
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232380&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
powerpc: Add some XFAILs to 20050603-3.c (PR68803)
In r230167 I mad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68803
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED
Target Milestone|6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66612
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I don't see it being fixed any time soon. a fix is likely too intrusive
for stage 4, so yeah let's just xfail it :-(
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: powerpc*-*-*
As it is, ppu_intrinsics.h has some support for mtfsb[01], nothing
else does.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hector at marcansoft dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This testcase from Hector
#include
struct fail {
uint32_t *p;
};
#define __ACCESS_ONCE(x) ({ \
typeof(x
||2016-01-26
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed. At expand time it already goes via memory.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66489
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #18 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(in reply to c#9)
Yes, this is a generic problem. recog will not recognise patterns
where regs are swapped in some places but not others. This can of
course be worked around in combine, but that will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56766
--- Comment #20 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That patch is similar to what all other backends do for similar
situations, yes. There is no nicer way to do things as far as I
know.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
||2015-06-30
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Please file a separate bug for that last problem (it seems to be a
combine problem; it has nothing
||2015-06-30
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
For some reason when combining the zero_extend with the lshiftrt,
combine writes it as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66706
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 2 16:27:11 2015
New Revision: 225344
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225344&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/66706
* combine.c (make_compound
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66706
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66706
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jul 3 14:37:26 2015
New Revision: 225382
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225382&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/66706
* gcc.target/powerpc/shift
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66588
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66556
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66773
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66217
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Jul 20 16:30:56 2015
New Revision: 226005
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226005&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66217
* config/rs6000/constraints.md ("S",
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66217
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 23 14:37:57 2015
New Revision: 226112
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226112&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66217
* config/rs6000/rs6000-protos.h (rs6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I'm testing a patch.
||2015-07-29
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hi Gary,
I'll try to reproduce the problem tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67045
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 30 02:34:09 2015
New Revision: 226378
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226378&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66217
PR target/67045
* config/rs6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66217
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 30 02:34:09 2015
New Revision: 226378
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226378&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66217
PR target/67045
* config/rs6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sat Aug 8 01:51:27 2015
New Revision: 226731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226731&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #43 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The archs that already use the real libgcc are arc, cris, hexagon,
m32r, nios2, openrisc, parisc, xtensa.
grep -w LIBGCC ~/src/kernel/arch/*/Makefile
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
There is no overlap, "data" just happens to live at a higher address
than "reference".
Closing as invalid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 18 12:21:41 2015
New Revision: 226967
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226967&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:27:50 2015
New Revision: 226971
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226971&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67288
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
This works fine with 5 and trunk. I won't backport it, it is much
too big a change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57195
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hello Michael,
Patches should be sent to gcc-patches@.
If you do, either make in_angle_bracket a bool, or actually count
the nesting level; and you probably want to handle the case where
there are more
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57195
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Please send it as a separate patch, not buried in an unrelated
target-specific patch. Use a subject that makes clear what the
patch is about.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67288
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
|ASSIGNED
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
That sounds like I did that. Oops.
Do you have some nice auto
|ASSIGNED
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Combine can handle most RTL expressions, although it sometimes
simplifies (or "simplifies") more than you want.
I think in this case what is already done in *add3_cc_overflow
will work well, but I do no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67344
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 25 19:32:28 2015
New Revision: 227182
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227182&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix PR67344
The "*and3_imm_dot_shifted" pattern is a define
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67346
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 25 19:35:15 2015
New Revision: 227183
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227183&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix PR67346
"*ior_mask" is a define_insn_and_split, so it s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67344
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67346
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||2015-08-28
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
Summary|RTL combiner is too eager |RTL combiner is too eager
|to combine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67305
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67305
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
--- Comment #6 from Segher B
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49195
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool 2011-05-27
19:51:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 24377
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24377
diff from good to bad insn-recog.c
||2011.05.27 19:52:23
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool 2011-05-27
19:52:23 UTC ---
Confirmed on a cross build with RTL checking on, error is
/n/10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49195
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool 2011-05-27
20:14:05 UTC ---
This is the match_op_dup operand in
(define_insn ""
[(set (match_operand:CC 0 "cc_reg_operand" "=x,?y")
(compare:CC (match_operator:SI 1 "scc_comparison_operator"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I have a fix.
|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2016-06-27
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||6.1.1, 7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jun 28 05:56:41 2016
New Revision: 237813
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237813&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix split of ashdi3_extswsli_dot for memory (PR71670)
The s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
anton: What flags for your test case? I fail to reproduce it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yes, but it fails with -m32 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71680
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
We have an insn:
(insn 32 33 34 3 (set (reg:DI 165)
(unspec:DI [
(fix:SI (subreg:SF (reg:SI 160 [ a ]) 0))
] UNSPEC_FCTIWZ)) 71680.c:11 334 {fctiwz_sf}
(expr_lis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71698
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71709
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71709
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Before the first RTL CSE, we have on that second strcpy:
(call_insn 47 46 0 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 3 3)
(call (mem:SI (symbol_ref:DI ("strcpy") [flags 0x41]
) [0 __built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71709
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yeah that looks better, I'm still confused by REG_DEAD vs. REG_UNUSED, sigh.
The whole logic here seems somewhat confused. Or at least it is confusing me
:-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Jul 4 09:52:38 2016
New Revision: 237958
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237958&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix split of ashdi3_extswsli_dot for memory (PR71670)
The s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71670
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Well. Here it is using a vector register (v31) as the iterator reg,
which we do not handle. Should we? Where does it come from?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux |powerpc64*-linux
--- Comment #3 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Actually, needs -mcpu=power8 as well, otherwise we get another ICE (we need
direct moves for FP regs in the ctr patterns; this is the case that is not
yet solved in PR70098).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #6)
> Note if you put the requirement that you need direct move, you will
> potentially have the problem in power7.
Yes; we have that same problem for FPRs alr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 7 03:09:03 2016
New Revision: 238076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Make the ctr* patterns allow ints in vector regs (PR71763)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70098
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 7 03:09:03 2016
New Revision: 238076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Make the ctr* patterns allow ints in vector regs (PR71763)
||2016-07-07
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So, compgotos does its job just fine. It has duplicated the indirect
jump to all its predecessors. One of those is a block that just does
an add (the op++ from the testcase) and then jumps to the indir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Created attachment 38847
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38847&action=edit
proposed patch to bb-reorder
Proposed patch. Works for the testcase in here without removing the
8 succes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69019
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Jul 7 17:08:00 2016
New Revision: 238121
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238121&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix gcc.target/powerpc/ti_math1.c on GCC 5 (PR69019)
This t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25287
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71847
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jul 12 15:10:08 2016
New Revision: 238250
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238250&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70098
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jul 12 15:10:08 2016
New Revision: 238250
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238250&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71763
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jul 12 15:13:47 2016
New Revision: 238251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70098
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Jul 12 15:13:47 2016
New Revision: 238251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-07-06 Segher Boessenko
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71493
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Is there a testcase? I cannot reproduce the problem. powerpc-elf-gcc
on both trunk and gcc-6-branch returns a struct in registers if it needs
at most two registers for that, in float regs if it needs j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71493
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
||2016-07-18
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work||4.9.1
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail||5.1.0
--- Comment #1 from Segher
2201 - 2300 of 3229 matches
Mail list logo
