Re: Status of m32c target?
> It's a bit like writing a new backend, except you have all this existing > code to worry about as well. Unless you start from scratch (which may > not be such a bad idea: you get to modernise it all, and it isn't _really_ > from scratch, you can peek at the old code and copy stuff from it). I disagree, it's nowhere near the difficulty of writing a new back-end, it's only a conversion from one representation to another and one could say that only "tactical" decisions are to be made, as opposed to more "strategical" decisions for a new back-end. And IMO starting from scratch is a bad idea. > But writing a backend is too much for a GSoC, even a small one. Definitely, and doing a CC0 conversion is probably an upper bound. -- Eric Botcazou
Re: Bugzilla timing out
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Hi - > >> Problems are still occurring for me; Bugzilla gives me 504 Gateway >> Time-outs when I try to access it tonight... > > OK, we reworked some of the database routine maintenance workload, > e.g., a nightly cleanup pass that was quite likely excessive, and > will keep monitoring. With all such administrative workloads keep in mind that "night" might be "day" in another timezone ;) Richard. > > - FChE
Re: Google Summer of Code 2018: Call for mentors and ideas
Hi, On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > following a discussion at IRC about an upcoming deadline to register GCC > as an independent organization for Google Summer of Code 2018 (GSoC), I > have volunteered to serve as the org-admin for GCC if: > > - there is not another volunteer (so step up if you are!), > > - the community does not object (so let me and/or the steering > committee know if you think I am not the right person!), and > > - we have at least 4 good project ideas together(!) with willing > mentors by next Monday January 22 (the deadline is on Tuesday). I > will be very happy if we have more. > I consider the above conditions fulfilled and have started applying. Unfortunately, Google requires there are at least two org-admins for an organization. We need to an additional admin by 6pm CET, which is in a little over 6 hours. So, who would like to do this with me? (We can have up to five :-). Since I have started this thread, I expect to do most of the org-admining, so any additional admin should not have that much work with it. But they apparently want a back-up as they want a reply to any inquiry they might have within 36 hours. My apologies for finding out this late but I did go through various documents about the program and the requirement was not listed there, it only popped up half-way through the application. Martin
Re: Google Summer of Code 2018: Call for mentors and ideas
On 23 January 2018 at 16:26, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Martin Jambor wrote: >> Hi, >> >> following a discussion at IRC about an upcoming deadline to register GCC >> as an independent organization for Google Summer of Code 2018 (GSoC), I >> have volunteered to serve as the org-admin for GCC if: >> >> - there is not another volunteer (so step up if you are!), >> >> - the community does not object (so let me and/or the steering >> committee know if you think I am not the right person!), and >> >> - we have at least 4 good project ideas together(!) with willing >> mentors by next Monday January 22 (the deadline is on Tuesday). I >> will be very happy if we have more. >> > > I consider the above conditions fulfilled and have started applying. > > Unfortunately, Google requires there are at least two org-admins for an > organization. We need to an additional admin by 6pm CET, which is in a > little over 6 hours. So, who would like to do this with me? (We can > have up to five :-). If it's OK, I can volunteer to be backup admin. Thanks, Prathamesh > > Since I have started this thread, I expect to do most of the > org-admining, so any additional admin should not have that much work > with it. But they apparently want a back-up as they want a reply to any > inquiry they might have within 36 hours. > > My apologies for finding out this late but I did go through various > documents about the program and the requirement was not listed there, it > only popped up half-way through the application. > > Martin
Re: Bugzilla timing out
Hi - On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:26:42AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > [...] > > OK, we reworked some of the database routine maintenance workload, > > e.g., a nightly cleanup pass that was quite likely excessive, and > > will keep monitoring. > > With all such administrative workloads keep in mind that "night" might > be "day" in another timezone ;) Sure, but there are only one or two of you ne'erdowells on the wrong side of the planet. :-) - FChE
Re: Google Summer of Code 2018: Call for mentors and ideas
On 01/23/2018 12:08 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 23 January 2018 at 16:26, Martin Jambor wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Martin Jambor wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> following a discussion at IRC about an upcoming deadline to register GCC >>> as an independent organization for Google Summer of Code 2018 (GSoC), I >>> have volunteered to serve as the org-admin for GCC if: >>> >>> - there is not another volunteer (so step up if you are!), >>> >>> - the community does not object (so let me and/or the steering >>> committee know if you think I am not the right person!), and >>> >>> - we have at least 4 good project ideas together(!) with willing >>> mentors by next Monday January 22 (the deadline is on Tuesday). I >>> will be very happy if we have more. >>> >> >> I consider the above conditions fulfilled and have started applying. >> >> Unfortunately, Google requires there are at least two org-admins for an >> organization. We need to an additional admin by 6pm CET, which is in a >> little over 6 hours. So, who would like to do this with me? (We can >> have up to five :-). > If it's OK, I can volunteer to be backup admin. > > Thanks, > Prathamesh If needed, please do the same with me. Martin >> >> Since I have started this thread, I expect to do most of the >> org-admining, so any additional admin should not have that much work >> with it. But they apparently want a back-up as they want a reply to any >> inquiry they might have within 36 hours. >> >> My apologies for finding out this late but I did go through various >> documents about the program and the requirement was not listed there, it >> only popped up half-way through the application. >> >> Martin
Different dynamical array debug info 7.2 vs. 8.0
Hi, I observed that gfortran 7.2 and 8.0 generate different debug info for dynamical array. Here is a case simplified from gdb test case gdb.fortran/vla-datatypes.f90 $ cat vla-datatypes.f90 program vla_primitives integer, allocatable:: intvla(:, :, :) logical :: l allocate (intvla (11,22,33)) l = allocated(intvla) ! vlas-allocated intvla(:,:,:) = 1 intvla(5,5,5) = 42 ! vlas-initialized end program vla_primitives In gcc 8.0, the intvla debug info is, <2>: Abbrev Number: 10 (DW_TAG_variable) DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0xcb): intvla DW_AT_decl_file : 1 DW_AT_decl_line : 2 DW_AT_type: <0x127> DW_AT_location: 3 byte block: 91 e0 7e (DW_OP_fbreg: -160) <1><127>: Abbrev Number: 14 (DW_TAG_array_type) <128> DW_AT_ordering: 1 (column major) <129> DW_AT_data_location: 4 byte block: 97 23 8 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 8; DW_OP_deref) <12e> DW_AT_allocated : 6 byte block: 97 23 8 6 30 2e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 8; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit0; DW_OP_ne) <135> DW_AT_type: <0x7b> <139> DW_AT_sibling : <0x174> <2><13d>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <13e> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 28 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 40; DW_OP_deref) <143> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 30 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 48; DW_OP_deref) <148> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 20 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 32; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><14f>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <150> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 40 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 64; DW_OP_deref) <155> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 48 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 72; DW_OP_deref) <15a> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 38 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 56; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><161>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <162> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 58 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 88; DW_OP_deref) <167> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 60 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 96; DW_OP_deref) <16c> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 50 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 80; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><173>: Abbrev Number: 0 In gcc 7.2, it is, <2>: Abbrev Number: 10 (DW_TAG_variable) DW_AT_name: (indirect string, offset: 0x12): intvla DW_AT_decl_file : 1 DW_AT_decl_line : 2 DW_AT_type: <0x127> DW_AT_location: 3 byte block: 91 e0 7e (DW_OP_fbreg: -160) <1><127>: Abbrev Number: 14 (DW_TAG_array_type) <128> DW_AT_ordering: 1 (column major) <129> DW_AT_data_location: 2 byte block: 97 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_deref) <12c> DW_AT_allocated : 4 byte block: 97 6 30 2e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit0; DW_OP_ne) <131> DW_AT_type: <0x7b> <135> DW_AT_sibling : <0x170> <2><139>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <13a> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 20 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 32; DW_OP_deref) <13f> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 28 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 40; DW_OP_deref) <144> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 18 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 24; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><14b>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <14c> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 38 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 56; DW_OP_deref) <151> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 40 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 64; DW_OP_deref) <156> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 30 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 48; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><15d>: Abbrev Number: 15 (DW_TAG_subrange_type) <15e> DW_AT_lower_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 50 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 80; DW_OP_deref) <163> DW_AT_upper_bound : 4 byte block: 97 23 58 6 (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 88; DW_OP_deref) <168> DW_AT_byte_stride : 6 byte block: 97 23 48 6 34 1e (DW_OP_push_object_address; DW_OP_plus_uconst: 72; DW_OP_deref; DW_OP_lit4; DW_OP_mul) <2><16f>: Abbrev Number: Attributes DW_AT_data_location and DW_AT_allocated are different. There is an extra "DW_OP_plus_uconst: 8" generated by gcc 8.0. Is it intended or expected? gfortran 8.0 causes many gdb.
Re: Google Summer of Code 2018: Call for mentors and ideas
Hi, On Tue, Jan 23 2018, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 23 January 2018 at 16:26, Martin Jambor wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Jan 17 2018, Martin Jambor wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> following a discussion at IRC about an upcoming deadline to register GCC >>> as an independent organization for Google Summer of Code 2018 (GSoC), I >>> have volunteered to serve as the org-admin for GCC if: >>> >>> - there is not another volunteer (so step up if you are!), >>> >>> - the community does not object (so let me and/or the steering >>> committee know if you think I am not the right person!), and >>> >>> - we have at least 4 good project ideas together(!) with willing >>> mentors by next Monday January 22 (the deadline is on Tuesday). I >>> will be very happy if we have more. >>> >> >> I consider the above conditions fulfilled and have started applying. >> >> Unfortunately, Google requires there are at least two org-admins for an >> organization. We need to an additional admin by 6pm CET, which is in a >> little over 6 hours. So, who would like to do this with me? (We can >> have up to five :-). > If it's OK, I can volunteer to be backup admin. > I was happy to accept both this offer from Prathamesh and another one from Honza and put down both as a co-org-admins and submitted our application. We'll be notified before February 12th whether we were accepted. I'll update the wiki with the new ideas tomorrow. Thanks, Martin
