GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Richard Biener

The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from

 https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/

and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision 277823.

I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
{x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
and report any issues to bugzilla.

If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Bill Seurer (POWER7)
On 11/5/19 6:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote:

>
> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>
> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision 277823.
>
> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>
> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
>

I bootstrapped this on BE powerpc64 on power 7 and 8 and on LE powerpc64
on power 8 and 9 and nothing untoward was seen.

--

-Bill Seurer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Matthias Klose-6
In reply to this post by Richard Biener
On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:

>
> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>
> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision 277823.
>
> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>
> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.

With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64, ppc64el and
s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite (compared to 7.4.0),
except for two issues on ppc64el:

FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2 has type
'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]

is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.

PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps requires scalar
epilogue loop" 0
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing stmts
using SLP" 1

Matthias
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Bill Schmidt-3
That second set of failures occurs already on 7.4.1...

On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:

> On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>>
>>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>>
>> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision
>> 277823.
>>
>> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
>> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
>> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>>
>> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
>
> With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64,
> ppc64el and s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite
> (compared to 7.4.0), except for two issues on ppc64el:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
> Excess errors:
> /build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
> warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2
> has type 'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]
>
> is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.
>
> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
> loops" 1
> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps
> requires scalar epilogue loop" 0
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
> stmts using SLP" 1
>
> Matthias
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Bill Schmidt-3
Er, sorry, I guess that is saying the same thing as it is broken in
7.5.  Oops.

On 11/7/19 9:24 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:

> That second set of failures occurs already on 7.4.1...
>
> On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>>>
>>>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>>>
>>> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision
>>> 277823.
>>>
>>> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
>>> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
>>> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>>>
>>> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
>>
>> With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64,
>> ppc64el and s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite
>> (compared to 7.4.0), except for two issues on ppc64el:
>>
>> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
>> Excess errors:
>> /build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
>> warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2
>> has type 'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]
>>
>> is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.
>>
>> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
>> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized
>> 1 loops" 1
>> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps
>> requires scalar epilogue loop" 0
>> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
>> stmts using SLP" 1
>>
>> Matthias
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Bill Schmidt-3
In reply to this post by Matthias Klose-6
On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:

> On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>>
>>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>>
>> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision
>> 277823.
>>
>> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
>> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
>> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>>
>> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
>
> With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64,
> ppc64el and s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite
> (compared to 7.4.0), except for two issues on ppc64el:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
> Excess errors:
> /build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
> warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2
> has type 'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]
>
> is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.
>
> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
> loops" 1
> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps
> requires scalar epilogue loop" 0
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
> stmts using SLP" 1


I finally bisected this to r275208:


2019-08-30  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        Backport from mainline
        2019-05-27  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR tree-optimization/90637
        * tree-ssa-sink.c (statement_sink_location): Honor the
        computed sink location for single-uses.

        * gcc.dg/gomp/pr90637.c: New testcase.

        2019-06-21  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR tree-optimization/90930
        * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (rewrite_expr_tree_parallel): Set visited
        flag on new stmts to avoid re-processing them.

        2019-05-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR c/90474
        * c-common.c (c_common_mark_addressable_vec): Also mark
        a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR_DECL addressable similar to
        c_mark_addressable.

        2019-04-25  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR middle-end/90194
        * match.pd: Add pattern to simplify view-conversion of an
        empty constructor.

        * g++.dg/torture/pr90194.C: New testcase.

        2019-04-24  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR middle-end/90213
        * gimple-fold.c (fold_const_aggregate_ref_1): Do multiplication
        by size and BITS_PER_UNIT on poly-wide-ints.

        2019-04-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR tree-optimization/90071
        * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (init_range_entry): Do not pick up
        abnormal operands from def stmts.

        * gcc.dg/torture/pr90071.c: New testcase.

        2019-03-13  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>

        PR middle-end/89677
        * tree-scalar-evolution.c (simplify_peeled_chrec): Do not
        throw FP expressions at tree-affine.

        * gcc.dg/torture/pr89677.c: New testcase.


This looks rather familiar, actually.  I seem to recall an SLP
degradation from a change to tree-ssa-sink.c on trunk this release. 
Richi, could there be a missing backport here?


Bill


>
> Matthias
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Richard Biener
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019, Bill Schmidt wrote:

> On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
> >>
> >>   https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
> >>
> >> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision 277823.
> >>
> >> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
> >> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
> >> and report any issues to bugzilla.
> >>
> >> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
> >
> > With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64, ppc64el and
> > s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite (compared to 7.4.0),
> > except for two issues on ppc64el:
> >
> > FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
> > Excess errors:
> > /build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
> > warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2 has type
> > 'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]
> >
> > is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.
> >
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
> > loops" 1
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps requires
> > scalar epilogue loop" 0
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
> > stmts using SLP" 1
>
>
> I finally bisected this to r275208:
>
>
> 2019-08-30  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> Backport from mainline
> 2019-05-27  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR tree-optimization/90637
> * tree-ssa-sink.c (statement_sink_location): Honor the
> computed sink location for single-uses.
>
> * gcc.dg/gomp/pr90637.c: New testcase.
>
> 2019-06-21  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR tree-optimization/90930
> * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (rewrite_expr_tree_parallel): Set visited
> flag on new stmts to avoid re-processing them.
>
> 2019-05-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR c/90474
> * c-common.c (c_common_mark_addressable_vec): Also mark
> a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR_DECL addressable similar to
> c_mark_addressable.
>
> 2019-04-25  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR middle-end/90194
> * match.pd: Add pattern to simplify view-conversion of an
> empty constructor.
>
> * g++.dg/torture/pr90194.C: New testcase.
>
> 2019-04-24  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR middle-end/90213
> * gimple-fold.c (fold_const_aggregate_ref_1): Do multiplication
> by size and BITS_PER_UNIT on poly-wide-ints.
>
> 2019-04-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR tree-optimization/90071
> * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (init_range_entry): Do not pick up
> abnormal operands from def stmts.
>
> * gcc.dg/torture/pr90071.c: New testcase.
>
> 2019-03-13  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>
> PR middle-end/89677
> * tree-scalar-evolution.c (simplify_peeled_chrec): Do not
> throw FP expressions at tree-affine.
>
> * gcc.dg/torture/pr89677.c: New testcase.
>
>
> This looks rather familiar, actually.  I seem to recall an SLP degradation
> from a change to tree-ssa-sink.c on trunk this release.  Richi, could there be
> a missing backport here?
Not sure - it's reassoc that messes up things here and a
--param tree-reassoc-width=1 "fixes" the failure.  For PR90930 I
restricted this to the last pass instance (but only on trunk).
Does it also fail on the GCC 8 and 9 branches?  Ah, on GCC 8 at least
the default target setting for this seems to be 1 (it's non-FP,
maybe you changed that), with explicit --param tree-reassoc-width={2,3,4}
it also fails the same way.

It's a bit late to try thinking about backporting this change
but I'll now consider it for GCC 9 at least.

So IMHO a latent issue, somehow the rev. triggered "inconsistent"
reassoc for the testcase.  I'm going to leave it as-is for GCC 7.5
(with the testsuite regression).

Are you fine with that?  An explicit --param tree-reassoc-width=1
on the testcase also would work for me if you prefer that.

Thanks,
Richard.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 7.5 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Bill Schmidt-3
On 11/11/19 7:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 11/7/19 5:48 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> On 05.11.19 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>> The first release candidate for GCC 7.5 is available from
>>>>
>>>>    https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7.5.0-RC-20191105/
>>>>
>>>> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from SVN revision 277823.
>>>>
>>>> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
>>>> {x86_64,i586,ppc64le,s390x,aarch64}-linux.  Please test it
>>>> and report any issues to bugzilla.
>>>>
>>>> If all goes well, I'd like to release 7.5 on Thursday, November 14th.
>>> With a distribution build (Ubuntu) on amd64, i386, armhf, arm64, ppc64el and
>>> s390x, I don't see any regressions in the GCC testsuite (compared to 7.4.0),
>>> except for two issues on ppc64el:
>>>
>>> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c (test for excess errors)
>>> Excess errors:
>>> /build/gcc-7-8odB_r/gcc-7-7.4.0/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr87532.c:45:27:
>>> warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2 has type
>>> 'size_t {aka long unsigned int}' [-Wformat=]
>>>
>>> is a new test, and only caused by default hardening settings.
>>>
>>> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c execution test
>>> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
>>> loops" 1
>>> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "gaps requires
>>> scalar epilogue loop" 0
>>> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
>>> stmts using SLP" 1
>>
>> I finally bisected this to r275208:
>>
>>
>> 2019-08-30  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]  <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> Backport from mainline
>> 2019-05-27  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/90637
>> * tree-ssa-sink.c (statement_sink_location): Honor the
>> computed sink location for single-uses.
>>
>> * gcc.dg/gomp/pr90637.c: New testcase.
>>
>> 2019-06-21  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/90930
>> * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (rewrite_expr_tree_parallel): Set visited
>> flag on new stmts to avoid re-processing them.
>>
>> 2019-05-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR c/90474
>> * c-common.c (c_common_mark_addressable_vec): Also mark
>> a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR_DECL addressable similar to
>> c_mark_addressable.
>>
>> 2019-04-25  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR middle-end/90194
>> * match.pd: Add pattern to simplify view-conversion of an
>> empty constructor.
>>
>> * g++.dg/torture/pr90194.C: New testcase.
>>
>> 2019-04-24  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR middle-end/90213
>> * gimple-fold.c (fold_const_aggregate_ref_1): Do multiplication
>> by size and BITS_PER_UNIT on poly-wide-ints.
>>
>> 2019-04-15  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/90071
>> * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (init_range_entry): Do not pick up
>> abnormal operands from def stmts.
>>
>> * gcc.dg/torture/pr90071.c: New testcase.
>>
>> 2019-03-13  Richard Biener  <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:rguenther%40suse.de>>
>>
>> PR middle-end/89677
>> * tree-scalar-evolution.c (simplify_peeled_chrec): Do not
>> throw FP expressions at tree-affine.
>>
>> * gcc.dg/torture/pr89677.c: New testcase.
>>
>>
>> This looks rather familiar, actually.  I seem to recall an SLP degradation
>> from a change to tree-ssa-sink.c on trunk this release.  Richi, could there be
>> a missing backport here?
> Not sure - it's reassoc that messes up things here and a
> --param tree-reassoc-width=1 "fixes" the failure.  For PR90930 I
> restricted this to the last pass instance (but only on trunk).
> Does it also fail on the GCC 8 and 9 branches?  Ah, on GCC 8 at least
> the default target setting for this seems to be 1 (it's non-FP,
> maybe you changed that), with explicit --param tree-reassoc-width={2,3,4}
> it also fails the same way.


OK; yes, I think one of our team did some refining of the reassoc
parameters in that timeframe, so this makes sense.

>
> It's a bit late to try thinking about backporting this change
> but I'll now consider it for GCC 9 at least.
>
> So IMHO a latent issue, somehow the rev. triggered "inconsistent"
> reassoc for the testcase.  I'm going to leave it as-is for GCC 7.5
> (with the testsuite regression).
>
> Are you fine with that?  An explicit --param tree-reassoc-width=1
> on the testcase also would work for me if you prefer that.


I am fine with leaving the testcase regressed; we have a good
explanation and this isn't a serious issue for users.  Thanks for
investigating!

Bill

>
> Thanks,
> Richard.