public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/111787] [14 regression] r14-4592-g0d00385eaf72cc breaks build
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 15:11:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-111787-4-0vupwdaiEi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-111787-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111787
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Does
2023-10-12 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR bootstrap/111787
* tree.h (wi::int_traits <unextended_tree>::needs_write_val_arg): New
static data member.
(int_traits <extended_tree <N>>::needs_write_val_arg): Likewise.
(wi::ints_for): Provide separate partial specializations for
generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N>> and INL_CONST_PRECISION or that
and CONST_PRECISION, rather than using
int_traits <extended_tree <N> >::precision_type as the second template
argument.
* rtl.h (wi::int_traits <rtx_mode_t>::needs_write_val_arg): New
static data member.
* double-int.h (wi::int_traits <double_int>::needs_write_val_arg):
Likewise.
--- gcc/tree.h.jj 2023-10-12 16:01:04.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/tree.h 2023-10-12 16:52:51.977954615 +0200
@@ -6237,6 +6237,7 @@ namespace wi
static const enum precision_type precision_type = VAR_PRECISION;
static const bool host_dependent_precision = false;
static const bool is_sign_extended = false;
+ static const bool needs_write_val_arg = false;
};
template <int N>
@@ -6262,6 +6263,7 @@ namespace wi
= N == ADDR_MAX_PRECISION ? INL_CONST_PRECISION : CONST_PRECISION;
static const bool host_dependent_precision = false;
static const bool is_sign_extended = true;
+ static const bool needs_write_val_arg = false;
static const unsigned int precision = N;
};
@@ -6293,8 +6295,14 @@ namespace wi
tree_to_poly_wide_ref to_poly_wide (const_tree);
template <int N>
- struct ints_for <generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N> >,
- int_traits <extended_tree <N> >::precision_type>
+ struct ints_for <generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N> >, INL_CONST_PRECISION>
+ {
+ typedef generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N> > extended;
+ static extended zero (const extended &);
+ };
+
+ template <int N>
+ struct ints_for <generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N> >, CONST_PRECISION>
{
typedef generic_wide_int <extended_tree <N> > extended;
static extended zero (const extended &);
@@ -6532,8 +6540,15 @@ wi::to_poly_wide (const_tree t)
template <int N>
inline generic_wide_int <wi::extended_tree <N> >
wi::ints_for <generic_wide_int <wi::extended_tree <N> >,
- wi::int_traits <wi::extended_tree <N> >::precision_type
- >::zero (const extended &x)
+ wi::INL_CONST_PRECISION>::zero (const extended &x)
+{
+ return build_zero_cst (TREE_TYPE (x.get_tree ()));
+}
+
+template <int N>
+inline generic_wide_int <wi::extended_tree <N> >
+wi::ints_for <generic_wide_int <wi::extended_tree <N> >,
+ wi::CONST_PRECISION>::zero (const extended &x)
{
return build_zero_cst (TREE_TYPE (x.get_tree ()));
}
--- gcc/rtl.h.jj 2023-09-29 22:04:44.463012421 +0200
+++ gcc/rtl.h 2023-10-12 16:54:59.915240074 +0200
@@ -2270,6 +2270,7 @@ namespace wi
/* This ought to be true, except for the special case that BImode
is canonicalized to STORE_FLAG_VALUE, which might be 1. */
static const bool is_sign_extended = false;
+ static const bool needs_write_val_arg = false;
static unsigned int get_precision (const rtx_mode_t &);
static wi::storage_ref decompose (HOST_WIDE_INT *, unsigned int,
const rtx_mode_t &);
--- gcc/double-int.h.jj 2023-10-12 16:01:04.260164202 +0200
+++ gcc/double-int.h 2023-10-12 16:53:41.401292272 +0200
@@ -442,6 +442,7 @@ namespace wi
{
static const enum precision_type precision_type = INL_CONST_PRECISION;
static const bool host_dependent_precision = true;
+ static const bool needs_write_val_arg = false;
static const unsigned int precision = HOST_BITS_PER_DOUBLE_INT;
static unsigned int get_precision (const double_int &);
static wi::storage_ref decompose (HOST_WIDE_INT *, unsigned int,
fix this?
It works for me in stage3 gcc subdir, but that worked fine without it too (I've
been using g++ 12 as stage1 compiler).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-12 15:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-12 15:08 [Bug bootstrap/111787] New: [14 regression] xxx " seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-12 15:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-10-12 15:23 ` [Bug bootstrap/111787] [14 regression] r14-4592-g0d00385eaf72cc " seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-12 15:24 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-10-13 6:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-111787-4-0vupwdaiEi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).