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 libstdc++/99117] [9/10/11 Regression] cannot accumulate std::valarray
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:25:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-99117-4-VDGMG46NZc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-99117-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99117
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work|7.5.0, 8.4.0 |
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
int* p = sum._M_data;
int* e1 = sum._M_data;
If p and e1 aren't __restrict__ too, shouldn't that be fine? Reading the same
value multiple times shouldn't create new clique each time it is read.
Though, isn't it before optimization a different argument instead?
I'd think even that should be ok, because using __restrict__ from FIELD_DECLs
is only ok if we can prove it is different structs (say pointers to them also
being restrict), but the current aliasing code probably doesn't do that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-16 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-16 5:26 [Bug c++/99117] New: " yasui at icepp dot s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
2021-02-16 7:43 ` [Bug middle-end/99117] [9/10/11 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 7:59 ` [Bug libstdc++/99117] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 10:41 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 11:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 11:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2021-02-16 11:40 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2021-02-16 11:47 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 11:54 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2021-02-16 14:07 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 9:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 10:35 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 11:43 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2021-02-23 13:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 13:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 13:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 14:17 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-23 14:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-01 8:19 ` [Bug libstdc++/99117] [9/10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-27 9:44 ` [Bug libstdc++/99117] [10/11/12/13 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 10:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-07 10:39 ` [Bug libstdc++/99117] [11/12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-08 21:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-15 11:44 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-16 15:12 ` [Bug libstdc++/99117] [11/12/13 " cvs-commit 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-99117-4-VDGMG46NZc@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).