https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99932
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #5)
> FIled https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia_bug/3299227
Nvidia reported it will be fixed in the next major cuda release. I've asked
about driver fixes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100293
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
This commit:
...
commit 3af3bec2e4d344bd54a134d8b2263f44d788c3d8
Author: Richard Sandiford
Date: Mon May 4 21:21:16 2020 +0100
internal-fn: Avoid dropping the lhs of some calls [PR94941]
...
adds:
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/569038.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98391
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Minimal example openmp:
...
program main
implicit none
integer :: i, j, k
integer :: n = 2
real :: a(2), c(2,2), cc(2,2)
a = 0.5
cc = 0
do j = 1, n
do k = 1, n
do i = 1, n
cc(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98391
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Fixed by:
...
do i = 1, n
+!$omp atomic
c(i,j) = a(k) + c(i,j)
end do
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98391
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Jakub, should this be marked as resolved-invalid?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OpenMP][nvptx] (Con't) |[OpenMP][nvptx, SIMT]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100232
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81778
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
C example:
...
/* { dg-additional-options "-foffload=-latomic" } */
#include
struct s
{
int i;
};
#pragma omp declare reduction(+: struct s: omp_out.i += omp_in.i)
int
main (void)
{
const int N0 = 32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
During lower_rec_input_clauses in omp-low.c, the reduction clause is handled:
...
case OMP_CLAUSE_REDUCTION:
case OMP_CLAUSE_IN_REDUCTION:
/* OpenACC reductions are initi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
Bug ID: 100352
Summary: libgomp.fortran/async_io_1.f90 -O0 execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Build at commit b9bc4467cc7 "tree-optimization/96513 - add testcase for fixed
bug".
Gcc configured like this:
...
$ ./build/gcc/xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=./build/gcc/xgcc
Target: x86_64-pc-li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
More complete backtrace using reproduction on command line:
...
Thread 1 "async_io_1.exe" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
__lll_unlock_elision (lock=0x6069d0, private=0)
at ../sysdeps/unix/sy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Minimal example:
...
program main
implicit none
open (10, file='a.dat', asynchronous="yes")
write (10,*,asynchronous="yes") 4, 3
end program
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
Going through the lock lifetime using backtraces:
...
(gdb) watch ((pthread_mutex_t *) 0x6059d0)->__data.__lock
Hardware watchpoint 2: ((pthread_mutex_t *) 0x6059d0)->__data.__lock
...
I. Locked from _gfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100352
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100390
Bug ID: 100390
Summary: FAIL: libgomp.fortran/depobj-1.f90 -O execution
test
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100390
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Fails not very often (twice in a run of 100):
...
$ for n in $(seq 1 100); do make check "RUNTESTFLAGS=fortran.exp=depobj-1.f90"
2>&1 | grep "expected passes"; done
# of expected passes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100390
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
In combination with stress -c 5, I get more FAILs:
...
$ for n in $(seq 1 100); do make check "RUNTESTFLAGS=fortran.exp=depobj-1.f90"
2>&1 | grep "expected passes"; done
# of expected passes1
# of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> So, something like this reflects the current state:
> ...
> diff --git a/gcc/omp-low.c b/gcc/omp-low.c
> index 7b122059c6e..a0561800977 100644
> --- a/gcc/omp-low.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100321
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
Bug ID: 100428
Summary: [nvptx, GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0] FAIL:
libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/reduction-
7.c -DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_nvidia=1 -DACC_MEM_SHARED=0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Likewise, c++:
...
FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c++/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/reduction-7.c
-DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_nvidia=1 -DACC_MEM_SHARED=0 -foffload=nvptx-none -O0
execution test
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||nvptx
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
The ptx code looks a lot like the cuda reproducer in PR99932 comment 4, so I'm
going to retest this once I get a driver where that one is fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Can you post a minimal version?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Doesn't fail for me unfortunately.
I've tried with GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0..-O4, no luck.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2)
> See below, fails with 4 systems, works with 3 others.
Can anything be deduced from driver versions?
Or card architecture?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
Does it pass with GOMP_NVPTX_JIT=-O0 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96005
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
On my usual machine, using system cuda I don't get beyond 6.1:
...
diff --git a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c b/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c
index 7a7a9130e84..ecf3803df3c 100644
--- a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c
+++ b/gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #8)
> I am wondering whether it has something to do with shfl now requiring .sync,
> especially for sm_70. (Non-sync version was deprecated in ISA 6.0 and for
> sm_70 r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100390
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100397
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96005
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> On my usual machine, using system cuda I don't get beyond 6.1:
Upgraded to ubuntu 20.4, giving me system cuda 10.1, which allows me to use isa
6.3. Now testing (u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96005
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 50800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50800&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
After investigation by Tobias, this looks like an instance of PR96932.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96932
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #3)
> Crossref: PR100497 - fails on Volta without
> membar.sys;
> before
> atom.global.exch.b32
>
> Unfortunately, compared to pre-Volta, it is very slow - membar.g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100565
Bug ID: 100565
Summary: [nvptx] Need configure options for misa default
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96005
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97102
Bug 97102 depends on bug 96005, which changed state.
Bug 96005 Summary: Add possibility to use newer ptx isa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96005
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96932
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 50811
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50811&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #13 from Tom de Vries ---
Posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-May/570508.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96932
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100497
--- Comment #16 from Tom de Vries ---
*** Bug 96932 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100573
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> Created attachment 50803 [details]
> Reduced testcase - works with hostfall back but fails with GCN and nvptx
Is this not an invalid test-case?
The semantics of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100573
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, I reproduced the problem on the original test-case:
libgomp.c-c++-common/for-3.c, and minimized from there:
...
$ cat libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c-c++-common/for-3.c
/* { dg-additional-options "-std=gnu99
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100670
Bug ID: 100670
Summary: unused attribute ignored on function definition
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100670
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Note btw that clang does not generate a warning:
...
$ clang -c -Wall -O0 -g -Werror foo.c -DTYPE="void *"
$
...
which means the attribute works, because if we remove the attribute we have
instead:
...
$ cla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100678
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #0)
> At this point, it's (a) unclear whether the PR83812 restriction indeed is
> supposed to be lifted for certain modern GPU hardware/SM levels/CUDA Driver
> releas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101011
Bug ID: 101011
Summary: Inconsistent debug info for "while (1);"
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108600
Bug ID: 108600
Summary: Use DW_LNS_set_prologue_end
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108600
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 54371
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54371&action=edit
tentative patch
Tentative patch.
For hello.c, for the -gas-loc-support case it gives us:
...
$ gcc -g ~/hello.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108600
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> Created attachment 54371 [details]
We probably don't want to emit in all cases, maybe limiting to
"dwarf_version >= 3", or "!dwarf_strict || dwarf_version >= 3".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47471
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108600
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> > Created attachment 54371 [details]
>
> We probably don't want to emit in all cases, maybe limiting to
> "dwarf_ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108615
Bug ID: 108615
Summary: Incorrect prologue marker in line table
Product: gcc
Version: 10.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108615
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108600
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> Note that for for instance gdb test-case gdb.ada/ref_param.exp, this
> convention was broken for gcc 7.5.0 (and I don't know how much earlier), and
> my current gu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104596
Bug ID: 104596
Summary: Means to add a comment in the assembly
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104596
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I am trying to understand what you are trying to do.
> You want to mark an insn with a comment
One ore more insns, yes.
> which is emitted during formation of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Posted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-February/590627.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104440
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104146
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104596
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
Submitted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-February/590721.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99555
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97338
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84958
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|nvptx |gcn
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97005
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> > Created attachment 52359 [details]
> > Cuda reproducer
>
> Filed at https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia_bug/3527713
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104714
Bug ID: 104714
Summary: [nvptx] Means to specify any sm_xx
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102429
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 52524
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52524&action=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104714
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> [ FWIW, it would be great if we could simply specify -march=native, and have
> gcc query the nvidia driver to see what board there is using
> cuDeviceGetAttribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102429
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104717
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
The test that is failing, is:
...
760 if (SSA_NAME_VAR (ssa_name) != NULL_TREE
761 && TREE_TYPE (ssa_name) != TREE_TYPE (SSA_NAME_VAR (ssa_name)))
762 {
763 error ("type mism
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104717
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #3)
> The mismatch seems to be:
> ...
> (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (name.typed.type)
> integer(kind=4)[0:D.4266] *
> (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (name.ssa_name.var.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104717
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
At original:
...
void foo ()
...
#pragma acc parallel
...
integer(kind=4) A.3[0:D.4266];
...
At gimple:
...
void foo ()
...
#pragma omp target oacc_parallel
...
integer(kind=4)[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104717
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #5)
> However, somehow the A.3 remains part of the BLOCK_VARS of foo, so when ipa
> inline (activated by pta-ipa, which does node->get_body ()) inlines foo into
> main,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
Bug ID: 104758
Summary: [nvptx] sm_30 support
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100408
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
FWIW, I ordered an sm_30 board, to be able to test this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104768
Bug ID: 104768
Summary: [nvptx] Exploit Independent Thread Scheduling for
sm_70+
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104769
Bug ID: 104769
Summary: [nvptx] mptx/misa multilibs
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104758
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
I'm now looking at:
...
diff --git a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.opt b/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.opt
index c83ceb3568b1..fea99c5d4069 100644
--- a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.opt
+++ b/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.opt
@@ -53,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104780
Bug ID: 104780
Summary: [nvptx, sm_30] FAIL: gcc.dg/loop-unswitch-4.c
execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104780
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104780
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> This looks like a bug in newlib/libc/machine/nvptx/calloc.c:
> ...
> void *
> calloc (size_t size, size_t len)
> {
>void *p = malloc (size * len);
>if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104783
Bug ID: 104783
Summary: [nvptx, openmp] Hang/abort with atomic update in simd
construct
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104783
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, I wonder if nvptx_reorg_uniform_simt should run inbetween SIMT_ENTER and
SIMT_EXIT.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104783
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Hmm, the atom insn sets a register that is not used anywhere. So the shuffle
communicating the result doesn't make much sense.
We can fix that by doing:
...
diff --git a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.cc b/gcc/conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104780
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> So if you file a bug there
Done: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28945
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104815
Bug ID: 104815
Summary: [nvptx] Use bitbucket operand when REG_UNUSED
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Componen
101 - 200 of 418 matches
Mail list logo
