The GCC DejaGNU testsuite has discovered some regressions. Here's one; this was reduced from testsuite/gcc.apple/4656532.c:
typedef long long __m64 __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (8), __may_alias__));
static __inline __m64 __attribute__((__always_inline__, __nodebug__)) _mm_slli_si64 (__m64 __m, int __count) {
}
__m64 x, y;
void t1(int n) {
y = _mm_slli_si64(x, n);
}
Compiled with LLVM-GCC (v76963) on Darwin/x86, this generates an ICE in the GCC/LLVM conversion layer.
Here's another test that want's to provoke lots of null pointer diagnostics; several such diagnostics are no longer happening, on lines 69, 71, 72, 75, 77, and 78:
The GCC DejaGNU testsuite has discovered some regressions. Here's one; this was reduced from testsuite/gcc.apple/4656532.c:
typedef long long __m64 __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (8), __may_alias__));
static __inline __m64 __attribute__((__always_inline__, __nodebug__)) _mm_slli_si64 (__m64 __m, int __count) {
}
__m64 x, y;
void t1(int n) {
y = _mm_slli_si64(x, n);
}
Compiled with LLVM-GCC (v76963) on Darwin/x86, this generates an ICE in the GCC/LLVM conversion layer.
Here's another test that want's to provoke lots of null pointer diagnostics; several such diagnostics are no longer happening, on lines 69, 71, 72, 75, 77, and 78:
<nonnull-3.c>
Here's another test that aborts at runtime (it's gcc.dg/pr26719.c):
for (i = 0; i < 32; i++)
for (j = 0; j < 256; j++)
table[i][j] = ((signed char)j) * i;
if (table[9][132] != -1116)
abort ();
return 0;
}
I've only scratched the surface here; my low-priority testing rig thinks it has found 400+ regressions. (It's wrong; it didn't locate libstdc++ this time, so most of the C++ tests failed.)
Do any of these "ring a bell" with anyone?
It doesn't sound familiar. Go ahead and file PRs for them. Thanks!