Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 23:47 +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > >> Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git > >> mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account > >> there. > > > > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] an

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 23:47 +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > >> Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git > >> mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account > >> there. > > > > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] an

Re: dg-skip-if was Re: gcc 4.3.0 i386 default question

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > Also, if you use a multilib option in testing, that option goes on the > > command line *after* the options specified in dg-options. The tests may > > need to use dg-skip-if to skip them if any CPU option other than the one > > in the test is explicit

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On Mar 13, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: On 13/03/2008, Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about -fshow-caret instead of -fdiagnostics-show-caret? (By analogy with -fshow-column.) Manuel> Well, we have -fdiagnostics-show-option and Manuel> -fdiagnostics-show-location.

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On 13/03/2008, Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> How about -fshow-caret instead of -fdiagnostics-show-caret? > >> (By analogy with -fshow-column.) > > Manuel> Well, we have -fdiagnostics-show-option and > Manuel> -fdiagnostics-show-location. So 2 versus 1. ;-) That said, I would > Ma

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyway, I think we moved slightly off topic here. Getting the > locations right is in general a much complex task than simply > providing caret diagnostics that show whatever location we happen to > have at hand. But let's start with what we hav

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On 13/03/2008, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:39:25PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > > In the case of an unitialized variable, accurate warnings require good > dataflow analysis that can handle correlated variables; something like > gated SSA might be needed to pr

Re: Official GCC git repository

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > >> Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git > >> mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account > >> there. > > > > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask what kind of sponsorship the

Re: Official GCC git repository

Daniel Berlin wrote: > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account there. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask what kind of sponsorship they want to require for a shell account (for write acc

Re: Official GCC git repository

> David Woodhouse wrote: > > To be honest, I find it weird that Subversion even exists. Precisely > > because it _is_ so close to what people were using before, as you point > > out. I've never really understood why anyone would bother to change from > > CVS to SVN -- it just seems to be part of t

gcc-4.3-20080313 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.3-20080313 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20080313/ 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

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:39:25PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mar 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > As you know the optimizers can pull together information > >from all over the place. The actual warning can be issued for code > >which looks very different from anything the

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

People keep asking you to take this off the list. Please do so. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

Chris Lattner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mar 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> As you know the optimizers can pull together information >> from all over the place. The actual warning can be issued for code >> which looks very different from anything the user actually wrote.

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On 2008/3/13, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:38 PM, J.C. Pizarro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ohh, contributions aren't accepted because they had not assigned > > the copyrights to FSF. > > > > Then, are we not doing it due to "GPL license" instead of

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:38 PM, J.C. Pizarro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ohh, contributions aren't accepted because they had not assigned > the copyrights to FSF. > > Then, are we not doing it due to "GPL license" instead of > "GPL licence + own FSF's policy"? No, please go and understand wh

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On Mar 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: As you know the optimizers can pull together information from all over the place. The actual warning can be issued for code which looks very different from anything the user actually wrote. Translating back to the problem in the user code ca

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On 2008/3/13, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is off-list, because you are wasting the time of the list readership. No, it's the readership that has to waste its little time if he wants to read the short lines mails. > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 08:14:38PM +0100, J.C. Pizarro wrote: > >

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 18:04 +, Andrew Haley wrote: > It's not possible for a VCS to be "different" -- it can only be > different from some other VCS. That's true. For a non-distributed VCS, the 'norm' is generally considered to be CVS. Subversion is "different from CVS", for a limited number

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:14 PM, J.C. Pizarro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008/3/13, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > J.C. Pizarro wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:44:29 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > > >> The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights >

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On 13/03/2008, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > I'm not certain that this is the tradeoff I prefer, but I haven't > > exactly done a survey of what diagnostics are emitted where. My > > general worry is that these more distant (from the

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

Hello! This one looks like another test slipping another unsupported instruction by. 0x020012b8 : bne,pn %icc, 0x200138c Is this UltraSPARC and not V7? Do we need two bad instructions in the test case? Executing on host: /home/joel/work-gnat/svn/b-gcc1-sparc/gcc/xgcc -B/home/joel/work-gnat

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Uros Bizjak wrote: > > Hello! > > > > > >> Can someone familiar with VIS provide an instruction > >> that is OK to do a run-time test with to check if > >> it is supported? > >> > > > > Perhaps this fragment fro

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

Thank you. I will rerun the tests on this target overnight with this change along with disabling profiling tests for *-*-rtems*. It looks like the wheat and chafe are separating a bit. :) --joel Uros Bizjak wrote: Joel Sherrill wrote: This is with the Fedora 8 qemu 0.90 RPM. There was a

dg-skip-if was Re: gcc 4.3.0 i386 default question

Joseph S. Myers wrote: On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, David Edelsohn wrote: Joel Sherrill writes: Joel> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/405-mullhw-1.c scan-assembler mullhw Joel> Are those things which would be expected to fail on a vanilla Joel> 603e target without networking or disk? Joel

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

Uros Bizjak wrote: Hello! Can someone familiar with VIS provide an instruction that is OK to do a run-time test with to check if it is supported? Perhaps this fragment from testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/tree-vect.h may help: #elif defined(__sparc__) asm volatile (".word\t0x81b007c0");

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On 2008/3/13, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > J.C. Pizarro wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:44:29 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > >> The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights > >> assignment file. > >> > >> David > > > > Why they've to be listed in FSF copyr

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:44:29 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > > The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights > > assignment file. On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 07:43:49PM +0100, J.C. Pizarro wrote: > Why they've to be listed in FSF copyrights assignment file? Because that is the poli

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

Joel Sherrill wrote: This is with the Fedora 8 qemu 0.90 RPM. There was a 0.91 release in January and the ChangeLog mentions a new cpu model command line option. It looks like it might be better although another command line I was using broke. Just to be sure this looks OK in qemu 0.9.1, her

Re: Official GCC git repository

* Joe Buck wrote on Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 07:17:18PM CET: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:01:46PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: [ switching to SVN ] > > The unfortunate thing is that other FSF projects haven't yet > > switched -- it baffles me that this is so. > RMS has decided to back bzr for Emacs, and

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

2008/3/13 Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培) wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Joel Sherrill > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Moving on the SPARC, I see a lot of similar > >> unsupported instruction failures. I only > >> see a

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

Hello! Can someone familiar with VIS provide an instruction that is OK to do a run-time test with to check if it is supported? Perhaps this fragment from testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/tree-vect.h may help: #elif defined(__sparc__) asm volatile (".word\t0x81b007c0"); Uros.

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:46:12PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:01:46PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > > However, if GCC proposes an official switch to a dVCS, RMS will push bzr. > > That does

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培) wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Joel Sherrill > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Moving on the SPARC, I see a lot of similar >> unsupported instruction failures. I only >> see a single sparc feature test. It is for >> "-multrasparc -mvis" and it

Re: Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Moving on the SPARC, I see a lot of similar > unsupported instruction failures. I only > see a single sparc feature test. It is for > "-multrasparc -mvis" and it is actually > passing on the sparc instructio

Re: Official GCC git repository

> > Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git > mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account > there. > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask what kind of sponsorship they want to require for a shell account (for write access to repositories, we usually only requi

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:01:46PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > However, if GCC proposes an official switch to a dVCS, RMS will push bzr. > That doesn't mean he gets his way; he wasn't happy with the svn switch > because sv

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Even simple things, like having to do git diff -rHEAD instead of git > > diff to see added files, etc. > > LOL! You can't be serious: why would *compiler* *developers* > be unable to grasp a few command line syn

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:44:29 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights > assignment file. > > David Why they've to be listed in FSF copyrights assignment file? Intel released original x86 hardware. AMD released original x86-64 hardware. Int

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not certain that this is the tradeoff I prefer, but I haven't > exactly done a survey of what diagnostics are emitted where. My > general worry is that these more distant (from the FE) diagnostics > will also be the ones where having good location info

Test Harness and SPARC VIS Instructions

Hi, Moving on the SPARC, I see a lot of similar unsupported instruction failures. I only see a single sparc feature test. It is for "-multrasparc -mvis" and it is actually passing on the sparc instruction simulator in gdb. It doesn't make me feel good that this part passes since I thought SIS w

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:01:46PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > David> using before, as you point out. I've never really understood > David> why anyone would bother to change from CVS to SVN -- it just > David> seems to be part of the 'one VCS per project' insanity. > > I suspect you haven't loo

Re: Official GCC git repository

On 13/03/2008, David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:35 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > If by "really weird" you mean "nobody has any real complaints about > > the way it works and are happy it is close to what they were using > > before", then yes, they are using

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 18:59 +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > Fair enough. I hereby volunteer to setup and maintain the git > mirror on gcc.gnu.org if someone provides me a shell account > there. > Feel free to include me if you need any help. Before you move it to gcc.

Re: Official GCC git repository

David Woodhouse wrote: > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:35 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> If by "really weird" you mean "nobody has any real complaints about >> the way it works and are happy it is close to what they were using >> before", then yes, they are using something "really weird". > > To be hon

Re: Official GCC git repository

> "David" == David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:35 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> If by "really weird" you mean "nobody has any real complaints >> about the way it works and are happy it is close to what they were >> using before", then yes, they ar

Re: Official GCC git repository

Daniel Berlin wrote: Well, no. We will never use git exclusively as long as it requires as many workflow changes for people as it currently does. This is not me speaking for the gcc community, this is me telling it like it is based on experience moving us to svn. lol! Maybe you should ask th

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:35 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > If by "really weird" you mean "nobody has any real complaints about > the way it works and are happy it is close to what they were using > before", then yes, they are using something "really weird". To be honest, I find it weird that Subver

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

Uros Bizjak wrote: Joel Sherrill wrote: I hacked on that test program to get the attached program. I ran it multiple times on qemu. ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 0x781abfd YES on SSE2 I am now printing the return value from __get_cpuid_max() ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 returned=0x2 0

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:27 PM, David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 12:47 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > We will never use git exclusively as long as it requires as many > > workflow changes for people as it currently does. This is not me > > speaking for the

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

> "Ian" == Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Why? Isn't the operator available at that point? Ian> The location information, if present, is technically available, but it Ian> would require some surgery to actually get it. I think the high-level decision to be made here is wheth

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 12:47 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > We will never use git exclusively as long as it requires as many > workflow changes for people as it currently does. This is not me > speaking for the gcc community, this is me telling it like it is based > on experience moving us to svn.

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

> "Manuel" == Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I tend to favor this, provided that the performance is not too awful. >> But maybe this is painful due to iconv translation? Manuel> How should a file be properly opened within GCC? I find the Manuel> code in libcpp/files.c pret

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Tobias Grosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 16:38 +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > > Hello, > > > > many people seem to be finding our git mirror of the GCC repo > > useful: > > Sure, I am using it since several weeks and it is a great >

Re: GCC 4.3 - Error: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Thanks for your understandable summary. On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was one additional solution discussed: disable libtool's checking > of dlopen() for newlib targets: > I think > every

Re: RFC: adding knowledge of the int_fastN_t types to the compiler

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, FX Coudert wrote: > Fortran requires that a negative value be returned if the "int_fastN_t type > isn't defined in the companion C compiler" (quoting from memory). Thus, of the > three cases: The "fast" and "least" types for 8, 16, 32, 64 are always present, according to C99

Re: RFC: adding knowledge of the int_fastN_t types to the compiler

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, FX Coudert wrote: > > Note that the size is not enough for implementing , you need the > > actual type as well to get C++ mangling right. So I suggest using > > type-name strings as is done for the other standard typedefs > > That raises a question: darwin has, for example,

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

Joel Sherrill wrote: I hacked on that test program to get the attached program. I ran it multiple times on qemu. ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 0x781abfd YES on SSE2 I am now printing the return value from __get_cpuid_max() ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 returned=0x2 0x781abfd YES on SSE2 Isn't

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

Uros Bizjak wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I hacked on that test program to get the attached program. I ran it multiple times on qemu. ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 0x781abfd YES on SSE2 I am now printing the return value from __get_cpu

Re: testsuite run-time test for sse2 support

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hacked on that test program to get the attached > program. I ran it multiple times on qemu. > > ext=0x0 sig=0x756e6547 > 0x781abfd YES on SSE2 > > I ran the same program natively and got this: > > ext=0x0 sig=0x75

Re: Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

The engineers currently are not listed in the FSF copyrights assignment file. David

Could someone please check if FSF received papers for Intel engineers?

Hi, We are almost ready to submit patches for stack branch. I'd like to verify that FSF has received all necessary papers for our team members Jinyun (Joey) Ye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Xuepeng Guo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Weiliang Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Could someone please check if there are any forms m

Re: Official GCC git repository

On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 16:38 +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Hello, > > many people seem to be finding our git mirror of the GCC repo > useful: Sure, I am using it since several weeks and it is a great improvement in many areas. For me it seems that the git mirror does not hurt in any way. Sur

Re: RFC: adding knowledge of the int_fastN_t types to the compiler

it's just targets that might have them but haven't had the relevant information recorded in GCC that I think should not have the types defined by default in GCC. (How this relates to Fortran is up to the Fortran maintainers.) Fortran requires that a negative value be returned if the "int

Re: RFC: adding knowledge of the int_fastN_t types to the compiler

I suggest runtime-variable values depending on a target-independent macro such as LONG_TYPE_SIZE. Also remember the various GNU/Linux targets that do not use config/linux.h (alpha, rs6000, sparc). Thanks for both hints, I'll update the patch. Note that the size is not enough for implementin

Re: [RFC] GCC caret diagnostics

On Mar 12, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: On 13/03/2008, Chris Lattner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is no right answer, and this topic has been the subject of much debate on the GCC list in the past. I really don't care to debate the merits of one approach vs the other wit