public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
@ 2023-07-20 20:18 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:25 ` [Bug target/110755] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 more replies)
0 siblings, 16 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2023-07-20 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Bug ID: 110755
Summary: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: aurelien at aurel32 dot net
Target Milestone: ---
The following code, extracted and simplified from the PowerPC implementation of
nearbyintf() in the GNU libc is wrongly optimized at -O1 and -O2 on ppc64el
with GCC 13. The fabs is removed, while it is not the case with GCC 12
#include <fenv.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <stdio.h>
static float my_nearbyintf (float x)
{
float r = x;
if (x > 0.0)
{
r += 0x1p+23;
r -= 0x1p+23;
r = fabs (r);
}
return r;
}
int main()
{
volatile float in = 0.5f;
fesetround (FE_DOWNWARD);
printf("mynearbyintf(in) = %lf\n", my_nearbyintf(in));
}
This causes the result to have the wrong sign.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/110755] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
@ 2023-07-20 20:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-20 20:28 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-20 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, this might be the case where you need -frounding-math since we don't
expectly implement the pragma.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/110755] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:25 ` [Bug target/110755] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-20 20:28 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:31 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2023-07-20 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #2 from Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Hmm, this might be the case where you need -frounding-math since we don't
> expectly implement the pragma.
Indeed the original glibc code is compiled with -frounding-math. However adding
it or not doesn't change the resulting code.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:25 ` [Bug target/110755] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-20 20:28 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
@ 2023-07-20 20:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 6:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-20 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |needs-bisection, wrong-code
Summary|Wrong optimization of fabs |[13/14 Regression] Wrong
|on ppc64el at -O1 |optimization of fabs on
| |ppc64el at -O1
Host|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |
|nu |
Last reconfirmed| |2023-07-20
Target|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |
|nu |
Build|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |
|nu |
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Target Milestone|--- |13.2
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Component|target |tree-optimization
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is not just a bug on powerpc either.
Folding statement: r_6 = ABS_EXPR <r_5>;
Applying pattern match.pd:1653, gimple-match.cc:35557
gimple_simplified to r_6 = r_5;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-20 20:31 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-21 6:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 8:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-21 6:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Priority|P3 |P2
Target| |powerpc64le
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
if (in.0_1 > 0.0)
goto <bb 3>; [59.00%]
else
goto <bb 4>; [41.00%]
<bb 3> [local count: 633507681]:
# RANGE [frange] float [8.388608e+6 (0x0.8p+24), +Inf]
r_8 = in.0_1 + 8.388608e+6;
# RANGE [frange] float [0.0 (0x0.0p+0), +Inf]
r_9 = r_8 - 8.388608e+6;
# RANGE [frange] float [0.0 (0x0.0p+0), +Inf]
r_10 = ABS_EXPR <r_9>;
looks like we mishandle signed zeros somehow.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-21 6:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-21 8:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 8:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-21 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
A big hammer solution might be to treat flag_rounding_math in frange::set the
same as
!HONOR_SIGNED_ZEROS, i.e. always extend [0, x] ranges to [-0, x] and [y, -0] to
[y, 0]
because we don't know what the rounding will do:
- else if (!HONOR_SIGNED_ZEROS (m_type))
+ else if (!HONOR_SIGNED_ZEROS (m_type) || flag_rounding_math)
{
if (real_iszero (&m_max, 1))
m_max.sign = 0;
if (real_iszero (&m_min, 0))
m_min.sign = 1;
}
Though, such a change would affect even say operator_abs handling where we even
for flag_rounding_math are guaranteed the sign will be positive (unless
-fno-signed-zeros, in that case it is right we don't assume anything).
Or do it in range_operator::fold_range? Or some other spot?
Generally, operations like neg, abs, comparisons should be fine, but +-*/ at
least in the fold_range direction probably need to do that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-21 8:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-21 8:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-22 20:20 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-21 8:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 55594
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55594&action=edit
gcc14-pr110755.patch
Untested patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-21 8:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-22 20:20 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-24 7:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2023-07-22 20:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #7 from Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Created attachment 55594 [details]
> gcc14-pr110755.patch
>
> Untested patch.
Thanks for the patch, I confirm it works as expected, now the result is a
positive 0 when using -frounding-math.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-22 20:20 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
@ 2023-07-24 7:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-24 7:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-24 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Actually looking at IEEE754, the fix should be limited to +- operations, not
+-*/.
Because only for +- IEEE754 has:
"When the sum of two operands with opposite signs (or the difference of two
operands with like signs) is exactly zero, the sign of that sum (or difference)
shall be +0 in all rounding direction modes except roundTowardNegative; in that
mode, the sign of an exact zero sum (or difference) shall be –0. However, x+x =
x–(–x) retains the same sign as x even when x is zero."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-24 7:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-24 7:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-24 18:31 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-24 7:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #55594|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 55616
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55616&action=edit
gcc14-pr110755.patch
Updated patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-24 7:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-24 18:31 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-26 8:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2023-07-24 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #10 from Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Created attachment 55616 [details]
> gcc14-pr110755.patch
>
> Updated patch.
Thanks. I have just tested it, and I confirm it fixes the reported issue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-24 18:31 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
@ 2023-07-26 8:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-26 10:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-26 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:21da32d995c8b574c929ec420cd3b0fcfe6fa4fe
commit r14-2782-g21da32d995c8b574c929ec420cd3b0fcfe6fa4fe
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Jul 26 10:50:50 2023 +0200
range-op-float: Fix up -frounding-math frange_arithmetic +- handling
[PR110755]
IEEE754 says that x + (-x) and x - x result in +0 in all rounding modes
but rounding towards negative infinity, in which case the result is -0
for all finite x. x + x and x - (-x) if it is zero retain sign of x.
Now, range_arithmetic implements the normal rounds to even rounding,
and as the addition or subtraction in those cases is exact, we don't do any
further rounding etc. and e.g. on the testcase below distilled from glibc
compute a range [+0, +INF], which is fine for -fno-rounding-math or
if we'd have a guarantee that those statements aren't executed with
rounding
towards negative infinity.
I believe it is only +- which has this problematic behavior and I think
it is best to deal with it in frange_arithmetic; if we know -frounding-math
is on, it is x + (-x) or x - x and we are asked to round to negative
infinity (i.e. want low bound rather than high bound), change +0 result to
-0.
2023-07-26 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/110755
* range-op-float.cc (frange_arithmetic): Change +0 result to -0
for PLUS_EXPR or MINUS_EXPR if -frounding-math, inf is negative and
it is exact op1 + (-op1) or op1 - op1.
* gcc.dg/pr110755.c: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-26 8:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-26 10:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27 9:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-26 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Summary|[13/14 Regression] Wrong |[13 Regression] Wrong
|optimization of fabs on |optimization of fabs on
|ppc64el at -O1 |ppc64el at -O1
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Should be fixed on the trunk so far.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-26 10:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-27 9:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27 17:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-27 9:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|13.2 |13.3
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 13.2 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.3.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-27 9:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-07-27 17:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-30 22:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-06 2:38 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-07-27 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
<jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e684084a5fa9edaedb1a14e118b966a60e3449b9
commit r13-7615-ge684084a5fa9edaedb1a14e118b966a60e3449b9
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Jul 26 10:50:50 2023 +0200
range-op-float: Fix up -frounding-math frange_arithmetic +- handling
[PR110755]
IEEE754 says that x + (-x) and x - x result in +0 in all rounding modes
but rounding towards negative infinity, in which case the result is -0
for all finite x. x + x and x - (-x) if it is zero retain sign of x.
Now, range_arithmetic implements the normal rounds to even rounding,
and as the addition or subtraction in those cases is exact, we don't do any
further rounding etc. and e.g. on the testcase below distilled from glibc
compute a range [+0, +INF], which is fine for -fno-rounding-math or
if we'd have a guarantee that those statements aren't executed with
rounding
towards negative infinity.
I believe it is only +- which has this problematic behavior and I think
it is best to deal with it in frange_arithmetic; if we know -frounding-math
is on, it is x + (-x) or x - x and we are asked to round to negative
infinity (i.e. want low bound rather than high bound), change +0 result to
-0.
2023-07-26 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/110755
* range-op-float.cc (frange_arithmetic): Change +0 result to -0
for PLUS_EXPR or MINUS_EXPR if -frounding-math, inf is negative and
it is exact op1 + (-op1) or op1 - op1.
* gcc.dg/pr110755.c: New test.
(cherry picked from commit 21da32d995c8b574c929ec420cd3b0fcfe6fa4fe)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2023-07-27 17:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-08-30 22:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-06 2:38 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-08-30 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed for 13.3+ and 14+.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 Regression] Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2023-08-30 22:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-06 2:38 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: hp at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-06 2:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110755
Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target|powerpc64le |powerpc64le, aarch64
CC| |hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
As alluded already in comment #3, this bug is generic: I built gcc-13.2 and
verified that it also exists (or perhaps more correctly put, existed) for
aarch64, for that version.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-06 2:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-07-20 20:18 [Bug target/110755] New: Wrong optimization of fabs on ppc64el at -O1 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:25 ` [Bug target/110755] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-20 20:28 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-20 20:31 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13/14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 6:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 8:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-21 8:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-22 20:20 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-24 7:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-24 7:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-24 18:31 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2023-07-26 8:52 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-26 10:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110755] [13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27 9:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27 17:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-30 22:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-06 2:38 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).