platform : microsoft windowsXP(32) sp2 intel core duo
i managed to build gcc-4.2.3 using MinGW-5.1.3 candidate with gcc 3.4.5
and binutils-2.17.50 in MSYS-1.0.10
../../src/gcc-4.2.3/configure --prefix=/mingw --target=i686-pc-mingw32
--program-prefix="" --with-as=/mingw/bin/as.exe
--with-ld=/m
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 11:23 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> The call ought to be always
> early inlined and not seen by any optimization pass.
The inlined functions don't actually appear in the generated code.
Look at the code generation differences for kernel/sched.c
function place_entity
$ size sc
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20080228 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20080228/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 28 Feb 2008 13:52:56 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it's probably a blocker issue on 32-bit x86 until we complete
> the lower subreg work to track subreg lifetimes to detect no-conflict
> sections manually. I have an implementation of that written before
> DF,
Hi,
I'd like to know your experiences with the gcc loop optimizations.
What loop optimizations (in your opinion) can be applied to a large
number of programs and yield a (significant) improvement of the
program run-time?
I've tested the gcc compiler optimization "loop unswitching"
(introduced i
"Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 28 Feb 2008 12:41:30 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > libcalls are still used for no-conflict blocks. This may be what you
> > mean by the scheduling thing. No-conflict blocks are emitted by
> > emit_no_conflict_block an
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 02:02:26PM +0530, Jaishri wrote:
> Hi,
> I am beginner in GCC. I want to make few changes in source code. What are
> the steps that I need to do to get the changes in effect and to test the
> changes?
> Any help is appreciated.
It's all on the web and wiki.
Configuring an
On 28 Feb 2008 12:41:30 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> libcalls are still used for no-conflict blocks. This may be what you
> mean by the scheduling thing. No-conflict blocks are emitted by
> emit_no_conflict_block and checked in local-alloc.
I thought the no-conflict bl
"Steven Bosscher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the quick response. As it turns out, the libcall issue will
> > > soon be gone, as bonzini will be deleting them. We have finally
> > > overcome that
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > Thanks for the quick response. As it turns out, the libcall issue will
>> > soon be gone, as bonzini will be deleting them. We have finally
>> > overcome that issue.
>>
>> Not really.
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the quick response. As it turns out, the libcall issue will
> > soon be gone, as bonzini will be deleting them. We have finally
> > overcome that issue.
>
> Not really. There seems always to be somethi
> "Ralf" == Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
Ralf> Wasn't there a proposal to use depcomp in gcc a while ago?
Yes. I'm planning to submit the automatic dependencies patch for real
in a week or two. I'm working through my backlog of 4.4 patches and
that is the last one.
To
> last 24 hrs I get this:
>
> make[2]: Entering directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
> make[3]: Entering directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
> rm -f stage_current
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
> Comparing stages 2 and 3
> warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
> warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o
> My real point in starting this discussion was to try to interest
> (sucker) one of the subreg specialists into helping me solve the issue
> of inserting move at the birthpoint where subregs or strict lower values
> are used.
I don't see your problem here. Any use (as in reading) of a
subreg ca
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hello Basile,
A mere quick portability review:
A big thanks
Commited into MELT branch rev 132754.
--
Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basilestarynkevitchnet mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencer
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Sergei Poselenov wrote:
> Gcc 4.2.2 release sources are patched with the Joseph S. Myers
> patch for E500 long double support
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg01388.html
There are a lot of preliminary patches and followups to them and to this
main patch that ar
Hi Taras,
Thank you for your message! Our main work (GCC-ICI) is
slightly orthogonal to plugins - our main goal at the moment
is to improve or automatically tune optimization heuristic
for evolving systems. However, naturally we implemented
it as a plugin system and we would be happy to have
a uni
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hello Basile,
A mere quick portability review:
A big thanks
* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:39:47PM CET:
compile-basilys-defs:
echo '#generated compile-basilys-defs' > $@
echo 'ALL_CFLAGS="' $(ALL_CFLAGS) '"' >> $@
e
Hello Basile,
A mere quick portability review:
* Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote on Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:39:47PM CET:
>> compile-basilys-defs:
>> echo '#generated compile-basilys-defs' > $@
>> echo 'ALL_CFLAGS="' $(ALL_CFLAGS) '"' >> $@
>> echo 'ALL_CPPFLAGS="' -I$(PWD) $(ALL
Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
>>
>> Birthpoints are not nearly as useful as phi-functions because the
>> algorithms that use birthpoints do not generally leave the birthpoints
>> in the right places when they are finished. There is a lot of value
>> added by the operand of phi-func
Hello List (& Bcc to GlobalGCC partners)
I now understand more what I need for MELT plugin inclusion.
I'm rephrasing my thoughts and experiments.
First, I'm recalling the general context. MELT may (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/MiddleEndLispTranslator for more) generate C
code during the compil
Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
Birthpoints are not nearly as useful as phi-functions because the
algorithms that use birthpoints do not generally leave the birthpoints
in the right places when they are finished. There is a lot of value
added by the operand of phi-functions. But they do solve the n**2
c
Hello all,
I've tried to build gcc-4.2.2 cross to E500 target,
configured with "--target=powerpc-linux-gnuspe
--disable-multilib --with-newlib --with-cpu=8540
--enable-cxx-flags=-mcpu=8540 --enable-e500_double"
but failed with the following message:
...
In file included from
/work/psl/tmp/cro
Hi,
as discussed briefly on IRC yesterday, I would be very happy to see
current DU/UD infrastructure changed to FUD chains (or on side SSA
form). This way it will be more symmetric to how tree level virtual
operands are handled and will hopefully make whole compiler more
standard and easier to foll
Thanks for the quick response. As it turns out, the libcall issue will
soon be gone, as bonzini will be deleting them. We have finally
overcome that issue.
Not really. There seems always to be something that prevents them from
being deleted, and I have no time to spend on GCC at work righ
Jeff,
Thanks for the quick response. As it turns out, the libcall issue will
soon be gone, as bonzini will be deleting them. We have finally
overcome that issue.
The subregs are clearly going to be the issue, and before i dive into it
i want to understand what it means to do a merge a bunch of
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:58:35AM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > We probably also can simply allow inlining variadic functions not
> > calling va_start. I must say that this option appeared to me but I was
> > unable to think of any sane use case. This probably is one ;)
>
> We already allow i
Jaishri wrote:
> Hi,
> I am beginner in GCC. I want to make few changes in source code. What are
> the steps that I need to do to get the changes in effect and to test the
> changes?
> Any help is appreciated.
I'm also a beginner, so I'll try my best but I cannot ensure you that my
'howto' is err
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:58:35AM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> We probably also can simply allow inlining variadic functions not
> calling va_start. I must say that this option appeared to me but I was
> unable to think of any sane use case. This probably is one ;)
We already allow inlining vari
Hi,
I am beginner in GCC. I want to make few changes in source code. What are
the steps that I need to do to get the changes in effect and to test the
changes?
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks and Regards
Jaishri
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > -static inline void __attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2)))
> > -__simple_attr_check_format(const char *fmt, ...)
>
> It would be nice to have a testcase, but I guess it is because GCC can't
> inline variadic functions. The function gets identified as c
31 matches
Mail list logo
