opened a missed optimization PR so that I won't forget about it - PR29160
dorit
> "Devang Patel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/09/2006 07:30:17 PM:
>
> > > Can these type casts (from uchar to schar and back) be cleaned away
> > > by some pass before vectorization, or do we need to teach the
> v
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:11 PM
> To: GCC
> Subject: GCC 4.3 Platform List
> 5. Add i686-mingw32 as a secondary platform.
>
> Reactions?
I think that adding mingw32 as a secondary is a good thing, and
Mark,
I just posted two small patches which together complete the
fix for PR26792. This knocks one blocking PR1 off the list.
Jack
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-09/msg00906.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-09/msg00908.html
Paul --
In addition to the Thumb-2 bits, I assume you plan to merge the other
ARM changes on the branch? Is that correct? (For example, what about
the NEON bits?)
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > 3. Update sparc-sun-solaris2.9 to sparc64-sun-solaris2.10?
>
> No strong opinion on the Solaris 9 -> Solaris 10 transition, but why switching
> to a 64-bit compiler? The 32-bit compiler is multilib by default on Solaris
> and AFAIK the vendor compiler
I've reviewed the list of open PRs for 4.2. We've gotten a bit stuck:
we're still at 116PRs, with 22 P1s, which is about where we were a
couple of weeks ago. (I'm going to try to beat down a few of the P1 C++
PRs tonight and tomorrow, but I doubt I'll get 16...) So, my plan is to
branch as s
> 3. Update sparc-sun-solaris2.9 to sparc64-sun-solaris2.10?
No strong opinion on the Solaris 9 -> Solaris 10 transition, but why switching
to a 64-bit compiler? The 32-bit compiler is multilib by default on Solaris
and AFAIK the vendor compiler is still 32-bit too.
--
Eric Botcazou
Mark Mitchell wrote:
1. Replace arm-none-elf with arm-none-eabi. Most of the ARM community
has switched to using the EABI.
2. Downgrade hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0 to
secondary platforms. Update HP-UX to 11.31? Update AIX to 5.3? I
like having these platforms in the
Jack Howarth wrote:
Since Apple is committed (at least in their advertising)
to provide 64-bit development tools for both PPC and Intel
in Leopard, it would seem a tad premature to downgrade the
powerpc-apple-darwin in favor of i686-apple-darwin for 4.3.
I think maybe it's best, after my i
> On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 20:21 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > > i386-unknown-freebsd
>
> The last time a freebsd testresult was sent to the list from the
> mainline was in May, maybe that is a sign that we should downgrade it to
> secondary from primary.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew Pinski
I've got an i38
Andrew Pinski wrote:
The last time a freebsd testresult was sent to the list from the
mainline was in May, maybe that is a sign that we should downgrade it to
secondary from primary.
I personally have no opinion about FreeBSD; I don't feel I know enough
to say anything sensible. However, the
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 23:11 -0400, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Reactions?
Change powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu to powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu so that
we also require the 64bit of PowerPC to work.
To be clear, you're suggesting that we say
"powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu", but mean t
Mark,
Since Apple is committed (at least in their advertising)
to provide 64-bit development tools for both PPC and Intel
in Leopard, it would seem a tad premature to downgrade the
powerpc-apple-darwin in favor of i686-apple-darwin for 4.3.
Why not just upgrade i686-apple-darwin to a secondary
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 20:21 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > i386-unknown-freebsd
Stupid mail client send this before I was finished.
The last time a freebsd testresult was sent to the list from the
mainline was in May, maybe that is a sign that we should downgrade it to
secondary from primary.
T
Mark Mitchell wrote:
My proposed changes:
1. Replace arm-none-elf with arm-none-eabi. Most of the ARM community
has switched to using the EABI.
2. Downgrade hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0 to
secondary platforms. Update HP-UX to 11.31? Update AIX to 5.3? I like
having
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 23:11 -0400, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Reactions?
Change powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu to powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu so that
we also require the 64bit of PowerPC to work. In the same way,
I would remove i686-pc-linux-gnu as x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu should
represent both.
> 2. Dow
It's a bit off topic, but as I'm thinking about GCC 4.3, I was reviewing
the GCC 4.2 primary/secondary platform list, and I think it's a bit out
of date. (See http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/criteria.html).
The SC is responsible for setting the list for 4.3 -- but I think the SC
would like the ove
Will be it clean the GCC 4.3 branch's plan?
* Cleaner TreeSSA?
* Cleaner MemSSA?
* Cleaner RTL?
* Cleaner Vectorizing?
* Tail Call?
Best regards
Obtenga su E-mail GRATUITO en http://www.clanomega.com
___
Get your own Web-based E-mail Servi
Danny Smith wrote:
cp/ChangeLog
PR target/27650
* class.c (check_for_override): Remove dllimport from virtual
methods.
testsuite/Changelog
PR target/27650
* g++.dg/ext/dllimport12.C: New file.
OK, thanks.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED
As I mentioned in passing last night, I'm reviewing the open GCC 4.2 PRs
and catching up on the mailing list traffic today, with the intent of
announcing a GCC 4.2 branch date later today together with thoughts
about staging the GCC 4.3 contributions.
I know that this is very short notice, but
Did anybody do some metrics how big the savings would be?
I think we should loom at the metrics before jumping to
conclusions about implementing such a feature.
On Sep 20, 2006, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:52:40AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> For extra bonus points, it may short-circuit relocations that call foo
>> (as opposed to taking its address) when it binds locally and skip the
>> jmp altogether. Ditto for
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:52:40AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> The linker already has code to merge sections. There's nothing to
> stop us from compiling every function into say:
>
> foo:
> jmp .foo.impl
> .section .gnu.impl.foo, "axM"
> .foo.impl:
> [actual code for foo emitted]
> .previ
> "Jack" == Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jack>Okay. Is it acceptable to open a PR on that
Jack> issue as a placekeeper for Darwin PPC64 support?
Yes, thanks.
Tom
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:09:49AM +1200, Danny Smith wrote:
> Revised patch.
Thanks Danny!
> Tested on i686-pc-mingw32
>
> Danny
>
> cp/ChangeLog
>
> PR target/27650
> * class.c (check_for_override): Remove dllimport from virtual
> methods.
>
> testsuite/Changelog
>
Andreas,
Okay. Is it acceptable to open a PR on that
issue as a placekeeper for Darwin PPC64 support?
Jack
26 matches
Mail list logo
