[Bug rtl-optimization/94344] New: Rotate pattern not recognized anymore

2020-03-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Consider the following MWE: int64_t f (int64_t x

[Bug rtl-optimization/94344] [9/10 Regression] Rotate pattern not recognized anymore

2020-03-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94344 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Created attachment 48145 [details] > gcc10-pr94344.patch LGTM. I did some tests (including the initial one) which all succeeded in detecting a sig

[Bug rtl-optimization/94344] [9 Regression] Rotate pattern not recognized anymore

2020-04-02 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94344 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|A

[Bug fortran/94769] New: Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- In function check_io_constraints local variable num is supposed to be initialized by function compare_to_allowed_values. While bootstrapping GCC on S/390 I get the following

[Bug middle-end/94774] New: Uninitialized variable retval in function try_substitute_return_value

2020-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 48377 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48377&action=edit If SAFE then ret

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Since one call chain is gfc_resolve_dt -> check_io_constraints -> compare_to_allowed_values and at least one parameter of compare_to_allowed_values, from which the initialization of variable nu

[Bug tree-optimization/94774] Uninitialized variable retval in function try_substitute_return_value

2020-04-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94774 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1) > Moving the guard up would suppress the dump output in the "unsafe" case so I > don't think that's what we want. OTOH, ether initializing the array,

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Since gfc_resolve_dt is a non-static function we cannot assume anything about argument DT. Argument DT gets passed to function check_io_constraints which passes values depending on DT, namely

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-28 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/544716.html

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

2020-04-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 94769, which changed state. Bug 94769 Summary: Possible use of uninitialized variable num https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|U

[Bug tree-optimization/94952] New: Possible false positive of uninitialized variable usage during release build in gimple-ssa-store-merging.c

2020-05-05 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 48450 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

2020-05-18 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 94952, which changed state. Bug 94952 Summary: Possible false positive of uninitialized variable usage during release build in gimple-ssa-store-merging.c https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94952 What

[Bug tree-optimization/94952] Possible false positive of uninitialized variable usage during release build in gimple-ssa-store-merging.c

2020-05-18 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94952 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|U

[Bug middle-end/95681] New: False positive uninitialized variable usage in decNumberCompareTotalMag

2020-06-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
, diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390 The following error/warning shows up on S/390 while

[Bug middle-end/96564] New: New maybe use of uninitialized variable warning since GCC >10

2020-08-11 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
mal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Consider the following MWE: extern void* malloc (long unsigned int); void fun (unsigned *x) { unsigned *a = malloc (*x); if

[Bug tree-optimization/96801] New: Refactoring of LIM introduced possible bug

2020-08-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Consider the following example: int a = 0, f = 0, g = 0, h = 0, i = 0; int b = 0

[Bug tree-optimization/96801] Refactoring of LIM introduced possible bug

2020-08-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96801 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Can confirm. This is resolved with the mentioned commit. Thanks!

[Bug tree-optimization/97152] New: Wrong code generation since commit b6ff3ddecfa

2020-09-21 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Since commit b6ff3ddecfa the following program prints the wrong number to stdout: int a = 0, j = 0; int *b = 0; int **c = &b, **i = 0; unsigned d

[Bug libitm/93782] New: ICE (segfault) while using TM in conjunction with UBSAN

2020-02-17 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
Priority: P3 Component: libitm Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Consider the following example: void foo(int n) { __transaction_atomic { char a[8]; a[n] = 42; } } Using GCC

[Bug preprocessor/99313] New: ICE while changing global target options via pragma

2021-03-01 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Component: preprocessor Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- #pragma GCC push_options #pragma GCC target ("arch=z13") #pragma GCC pop_options $ gcc t.c -c -march=z900 test.c:3:9: internal compiler error: '

[Bug sanitizer/99814] New: regexec fails with -fsanitize=address

2021-03-29 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone

[Bug sanitizer/99814] regexec fails with -fsanitize=address

2021-03-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99814 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Breakpoint 4, __interception::InterceptFunction (name=0x3fffd61e8f2 "regexec", ver=0x3fffd61eb7e "GLIBC_2.3.4", ptr_to_real=0x3fffd677d08 <__interception::real_regexec>, func=16779728, wra

[Bug sanitizer/99814] regexec fails with -fsanitize=address

2021-03-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99814 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for the pointers! I reported it upstream in issue [1390](https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/1390)

[Bug ada/97504] [11 Regression] Ada bootstrap error after r11-4029

2020-10-21 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefansf at linux dot

[Bug ada/97504] [11 Regression] Ada bootstrap error after r11-4029

2020-10-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97504 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #5) > Created attachment 49427 [details] > patch that should fix the remaining s390 problem > > So, the issue is already fixed on aarch64-*, powerpc*-

[Bug tree-optimization/97545] New: ICE since commit 90e88fd376b and using selective-scheduling2

2020-10-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 49433 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49433&action=edit reduced failing

[Bug tree-optimization/98094] New: ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984

2020-12-02 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Compiling SPEC benchmark 502.gcc_r on S/390 results in the following ICE: $ /devel/gcc-2/dst/bin/gcc -c -o tree.o -DSPEC -DNDEBUG -I. -I./include -I./spec_qsort

[Bug tree-optimization/98094] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984

2020-12-02 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98094 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Reduced program: struct { unsigned a : 10 } b;

[Bug tree-optimization/98094] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984

2020-12-02 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98094 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I still run into the same error with e4c02ce4ab6fce1148f4025360096f18764deadf

[Bug tree-optimization/98094] ICE in decompose, at wide-int.h:984

2020-12-02 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98094 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|U

[Bug rtl-optimization/99221] New: copyprop_hardreg_forward_1 deletes insn by mistake

2021-02-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 50242 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50242&action=edit a-foo.i.301r.jump2 Consider the following reduced

[Bug rtl-optimization/99221] copyprop_hardreg_forward_1 deletes insn by mistake

2021-02-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99221 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 50243 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50243&action=edit a-foo.i.307r.cprop_hardreg

[Bug tree-optimization/99253] New: tree-vect-loop wrong code

2021-02-24 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390x, x86_64-*-* int a = 0; static int b = 0; long c = 0; int main() { for (int d = 0; d < 8; d++) { a ^= c; b

[Bug tree-optimization/99253] [10/11 Regression] tree-vect-loop wrong code

2021-02-25 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99253 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Still aborts with -fno-vect-cost-model on IBM Z.

[Bug tree-optimization/99253] [10 Regression] tree-vect-loop wrong code

2021-02-25 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99253 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug tree-optimization/100263] New: Wrong removal of statement in copyprop3

2021-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390*-*-* Created attachment 50676 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50676&action=edit copyprop3 int a = 3, d, l,

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- You are right. I got lured by the fact that the assignments c__lsm.20_94 = 1; and c__lsm_flag.21_95 = 1; of bb5 are "moved" into the PHI as e.g. # c__lsm.20_51 = PHI # c__lsm_flag.21_5

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-04-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- It looks like a mode mismatch: (insn 201 200 378 3 (set (reg:DI 17 %f2 [196]) (const_int 1 [0x1])) "t.c":23:36 1467 {*movdi_64} (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (const_int 1 [0x1]) (

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-04-28 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Prior postreload we have (insn 12 379 332 3 (set (reg:QI 17 %f2 [orig:198 l_lsm_flag.27 ] [198]) (const_int 1 [0x1])) 1480 {*movqi} (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (const_int 1 [0x1])

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-04-28 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Shouldn't we rather check for REG_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_P? A check for TARGET_HARD_REGNO_MODE_OK for a FP register and QImode is successful. Using the following also fixes the test for me: diff --

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-04-28 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 --- Comment #11 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #10) > OK, then it's probably better to add it to: > > if (!is_a (reg_mode[regno], &old_mode) > || !MODES_OK_FOR_MOVE2ADD (mode, old_mod

[Bug rtl-optimization/100263] [11/12 Regression] RTL optimizers miscompile loop

2021-05-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100263 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resoluti

[Bug middle-end/100562] New: ICE after commit a076632e274abe344ca7648b7c7f299273d4cbe0

2021-05-12 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390*-*-* Since commit g:a076632e274abe344ca7648b7c7f299273d4cbe0 building GCC with Go language enabled on IBM Z

[Bug debug/100960] New: var-tracking: parameter location in subregister not tracked

2021-06-08 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Priority: P3 Component: debug Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390x-*-* Created attachment 50960 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50960&action=e

[Bug c/101066] New: Wrong code after fixup_cfg3

2021-06-14 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390*-*-*, x86_64-*-* int a = 1, c, d, e; int *b = &a; static int g(int *h) { c = *h; return d; } static void f(int *h) { e = *h;

[Bug analyzer/99212] [11 Regression] gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c line 971

2021-06-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefansf at linux dot

[Bug analyzer/99212] [11 Regression] gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c line 971

2021-06-18 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99212 --- Comment #20 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The mentioned failing test cases are fixed on IBM Z, now. Thanks for your help!

[Bug ipa/101066] [10/11/12 Regression] Wrong code after fixup_cfg3 since r10-3311-gff6686d2e5f797d6

2021-06-24 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101066 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #3) > I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/573338.html I gave it a try on IBM Z where the t

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-01-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 54277 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54277&action=edit reduced version of the initial problem

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-01-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 54278 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54278&action=edit RTL dump of sched2 if compiled without debug information

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-01-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 54279 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54279&action=edit RTL dump of sched2 if compiled with debug information

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-01-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #11 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Please find attached a reduced version of the initial problem. If compiled with g++ -O2 -march=arch13 -fno-exceptions (-g) there is still a difference whether build with debug information o

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-01-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #12 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The culprit seems to be that s390_sched_init is not called in one particular case. We have the following basic blocks and edges: 6 --> 12 --> 13 --> 14 The edges from 12 to 13 and 13 to 14 a

[Bug middle-end/108687] New: Non-termination since gcc-13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- typedef struct { int a[32]; } b; b c; int d, e, f; void g () { for (; c.a[f - 1]; f++) { e = e * d; c.a[f] = f / d; } } Running gcc -O3 -c t.c on s390x

[Bug middle-end/108687] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #0) > Running gcc -O3 -c t.c on s390x does not terminate. More specifically: gcc -O3 -march=z13 -c t.c

[Bug middle-end/108687] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 54415 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54415&action=edit Random backtrace after some time

[Bug middle-end/108687] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I have added a backtrace from GDB where I randomly interrupted. Hope this helps to narrow it down.

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-02-07 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #14 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I'm still working on this and currently test a new patch which should fix the scheduler handling in the backend.

[Bug tree-optimization/108687] [13 Regression] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-09 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Just to be sure: in the initial commit I missed adding -march=z13 and only mentioned it in commit 2 I will come up with those logs and mail them to you.

[Bug tree-optimization/108687] [13 Regression] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-09 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I came up with a cross compiler where I can reproduce it: FROM fedora:37 RUN dnf -y upgrade \ && dnf -y install 'dnf-command(builddep)' \ && dnf -y builddep gcc \ && dnf -y install binu

[Bug tree-optimization/108687] [13 Regression] Non-termination since r13-5630-g881bf8de9b0

2023-02-10 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108687 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Can confirm the attached patch solves this issue.

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2023-02-13 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #16 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Fixed in mainline. Fine for me to close this now.

[Bug rtl-optimization/104814] New: [10/11/12 Regression] ifcvt: Deleting live variable in IF-CASE-2

2022-03-07 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390x-*-* Created attachment 52570 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi

[Bug rtl-optimization/104814] [10/11/12 Regression] ifcvt: Deleting live variable in IF-CASE-2

2022-03-07 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104814 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 52571 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52571&action=edit dump combine

[Bug rtl-optimization/104814] [10/11/12 Regression] ifcvt: Deleting live variable in IF-CASE-2

2022-03-07 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104814 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Oh forgot to mention it is just: gcc -O1 t.c Works fine with -O{0,2,3}

[Bug rtl-optimization/104814] [10/11 Regression] ifcvt: Deleting live variable in IF-CASE-2

2022-03-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104814 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Gave trunk a try and it worked fine for me. Thanks for the fix!

[Bug debug/100960] var-tracking: parameter location in subregister not tracked

2022-08-11 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100960 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I really like the idea of enhancing cselib since there is a chance that other passes might profit from it, too. The following patch fixes the initial reported problem: diff --git a/gcc/cselib

[Bug debug/100960] var-tracking: parameter location in subregister not tracked

2022-08-11 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100960 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- However, I found another example (see attachment a-t2.c.325r.vartrack) which does not profit from the patch: __attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void fn1 (int x) { __asm volatile ("" : "+r"

[Bug debug/100960] var-tracking: parameter location in subregister not tracked

2022-08-11 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100960 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 53433 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53433&action=edit a-t2.c.325r.vartrack

[Bug target/106355] Linux s390x -O2 argument passing miscompile

2022-08-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106355 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The problem is with sibling call optimization where parameters with BLKmode are not handled correctly. I will prepare a patch and submit it shortly.

[Bug middle-end/107088] [13 Regression] cselib ICE building __trunctfxf2 on ia64

2022-09-29 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107088 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The patch introduces scalar_int_mode int_mode; if (REG_P (x) && is_int_mode (mode, &int_mode) && REG_VALUES (REGNO (x)) != NULL && (!cselib_current_insn || !DEBUG_INSN_P (cselib_curre

[Bug middle-end/107088] [13 Regression] cselib ICE building __trunctfxf2 on ia64

2022-09-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107088 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for looking into this! Currently I'm out of office and have very limited internet access. I will be back on Tuesday and look right into this. If this is to late feel free to revert my p

[Bug rtl-optimization/107094] [13 Regression] ICE in require, at machmode.h:297 since r13-2916-gd0b00b63a39108

2022-09-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107094 --- Comment #1 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Looks like related to PR107088

[Bug middle-end/107088] [13 Regression] cselib ICE building __trunctfxf2 on ia64

2022-09-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107088 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I did a quick test using diff --git a/gcc/cselib.cc b/gcc/cselib.cc index 9b582e5d3d6..2fd0190bc79 100644 --- a/gcc/cselib.cc +++ b/gcc/cselib.cc @@ -1571,6 +1571,7 @@ new_cselib_val (unsigne

[Bug middle-end/107088] [13 Regression] cselib ICE building __trunctfxf2 on ia64

2022-10-04 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107088 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #8) > Looks good, but maybe: > > GET_MODE_SIZE (int_mode) > 1 > > would be more general. I very much like the idea of a size guard. Posted a

[Bug tree-optimization/103063] New: Wrong code while using -O3

2021-11-03 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- int a = 0; unsigned char b = 0; int main() { a - 6; for (; a >= -13; a = a - 8) while((unsigned char)(b-- * 6)) ; if (b != 127) __builtin_abort(); ret

[Bug tree-optimization/102720] [12 regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ldist-strlen-1.c and ldist-strlen-2.c fail after r12-4324

2021-10-13 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102720 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefansf at linux dot

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

2021-10-14 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- It looks like I missed to take the TREE_TYPE of reduction_var. I just did a quick test with diff --git a/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c b/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c index fb9250031b5..0559b9c

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

2021-10-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 51606 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51606&action=edit Fix determining precission of reduction_var

[Bug tree-optimization/102752] [12 Regression] Recent change to ldist causing ICE on msp430-elf, rl78-elf, and xstormy16-elf

2021-10-15 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102752 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Thanks for confirmation! Bootstrap and regtest are still running on x86 as well as IBM Z. I will commit the attached patch assuming successful runs.

[Bug rust/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2022-12-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefansf at linux dot

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2022-12-23 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I was playing around with this and was wondering how can I actually execute the stageN compiler? From the output of make I see two compilations for object rust-hir-trait-resolve.o. Thus the fi

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2022-12-24 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 54154 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54154&action=edit preprocessed rust-hir-trait-resolve.cc

[Bug middle-end/108102] rust bootstrap comparison failure on s390x-linux-gnu

2022-12-24 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108102 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The difference in the assembly output shown in comment 2 happens in function void AssociatedImplTrait::setup_associated_types ( const TyTy::BaseType *self, const TyTy::TypeBoundPredicate &b

[Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] regcprop: Determine subreg offset depending on endianness

2022-06-09 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #18 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Fixed for 12 and mainline.

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] New: Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-06-29 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefansf at linux dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- Target: s390*-*-* struct a { unsigned b : 7; int c; int d; short e; } p, *q = &p; int f, g, h, i, r, s; static short

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-06-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- The problem shows up for option -O1 (options -O{0,2,3} are fine) and GCC 10 and 11 (mainline and GCC 9 are fine).

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-06-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #5 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Yes, I'm already looking into this.

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-06-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I had a look at the optimized tree output which looks good to me. However, I see that split2 transforms (insn 218 222 114 15 (set (reg/v:TI 10 %r10 [orig:87 a ] [87]) (reg/v:TI 18 %f4

[Bug tree-optimization/101260] [10/11 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-07-01 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Pass split2 transforms (insn 218 222 114 15 (set (reg/v:TI 10 %r10 [orig:87 a ] [87]) (reg/v:TI 18 %f4 [orig:87 a ] [87])) 1466 {movti} (nil)) into (insn 234 222 235 15 (set (r

[Bug middle-end/95681] False positive uninitialized variable usage in decNumberCompareTotalMag

2021-07-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95681 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Created attachment 51160 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51160&action=edit Reduced program

[Bug middle-end/95681] False positive uninitialized variable usage in decNumberCompareTotalMag

2021-07-16 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95681 --- Comment #4 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Running todays mainline (d97d71a1989) using options -O3 -Wall against the reduced program on x86 as well as s390x results in t.c: In function 'decNumberCompareTotalMag': t.c:55:14: warning: '*

[Bug rtl-optimization/101260] [10/11/12 Regression] Backport 27381e78925 to GCC 11

2021-08-06 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101260 --- Comment #10 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- In regcprop we call find_oldest_value_reg which itself calls maybe_mode_change (TImode, TImode, DImode, 10, 18) where we have regno += subreg_regno_offset (regno, orig_mode, offset, new

[Bug target/113960] std::map with std::vector as input overwrites itself with c++20, on s390x platform

2024-02-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113960 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- This seems to be a bug in the three way comparison introduced with C++20. The bug happens while deciding whether key v2 already exists in the map or not. template constexpr auto lexicogr

[Bug target/113960] std::map with std::vector as input overwrites itself with c++20, on s390x platform

2024-02-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113960 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jwakely at redhat dot com

[Bug target/113960] std::map with std::vector as input overwrites itself with c++20, on s390x platform

2024-02-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113960 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Guard __is_byte_iter checks for contiguous bytes which I guess is fine for std::vector and then checks for __is_memcmp_ordered which is fine for big-endian targets in conjunction with unsigned

[Bug target/113960] std::map with std::vector as input overwrites itself with c++20, on s390x platform

2024-02-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113960 --- Comment #9 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > We can't use memcmp if the sizes are different. We don't want to use the > min, we want to guard that code with the sizes being the same, then w

[Bug target/113994] [13/14 Regression] Probable C++ code generation bug with -O2 on s390x platform

2024-02-29 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113994 --- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Looks like wrong liveness information. The problem is that df_analyze_loop only considers basic blocks which strictly belong to a loop which is not enough. During loop2_doloop basic block 9

[Bug testsuite/109549] [14 Regression] Conditional move regressions after r14-53-g675b1a7f113adb1d737adaf78b4fd90be7a0ed1a

2024-03-01 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549 --- Comment #11 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- I will have a look at those s390x failures and come up with a TARGET_NOCE_CONVERSION_PROFITABLE_P implementation.

  1   2   >