Re: query regarding adding a pass to undo final value replacement.

Hi, >> >> >> So if the ssa_names are infact reused they won't be the same >> >> computations. >> > >> > do you also check this for ssa names inside the loop (in your example, >> > D.10_1? >> >> If we have to reinsert for a = phi (B) . We do the following checks. >> >> 1. If the edge information in

Re: query regarding adding a pass to undo final value replacement.

Hi, > [Sorry about dropping the ball on this. I've had some trouble with > internet connectivity and was on vacation for a few days. ] > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> >> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back

Re: query regarding adding a pass to undo final value replacement.

Hi Zdenek, [Sorry about dropping the ball on this. I've had some trouble with internet connectivity and was on vacation for a few days. ] On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > >> >> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back and its

trivial gccint documentation bug

Hi, On section 16.9 Standard Pattern Names For Generation, first line of description of 'strlenm': It seems to use four operands, not three. -- Regards, Namhyung Kim

how does GCC support 24 bit addresses on 16 bit targets ?

I'm porting for C166 microcontrollers. It supports 24 bit addresses, but as I know, GCC does not support segmented memory, which is devided into many pages. C166 has four page of addressed, each page has a 16 bit address space. The selection of which page to use is controlled by for DPP register

Re: divmodsi4

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 10 October 2008 15:53: > >> "Omar Torres" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> The problem is that both, the quotient and reminder, registers are >>> getting marked with a REG_UNUSED note: >>> >>> (in

Re: install path in libgcc Makefile.in

On 04:19 Mon 13 Oct , Eus wrote: > Hi Ho! > > On Saturday, October 11, 2008, "Zhang Le" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Another problem when cross building the native mips compiler. > > I.e. build=x86, host=target=mipsel > > I have done some search, but haven't found any related

Re: gcc moving memory reference across call

> > It's a field in the class$ structure. class$ is initialized by creating a > CONSTRUCTOR tree and calling CONSTRUCTOR_APPEND_ELT for each field. The > DECL_INITIAL of class$ points to the CONSTRUCTOR tree. > > _CD_pp is an array of void*. These are initialized by DECL_INITIAL too. > > InitCla

Re: gcc moving memory reference across call

Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Richard Guenther wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 04:42:08PM +0200, Markus Milleder wrote: > Vincent Lefevre schrieb am 13.10.2008 16:16:38: > > > On 2008-10-07 21:42:30 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > But is there any "need to upgrade" to 2.3.2 since it would fix a bug > > > gcc ran into? > > > > FYI, GCC can be affected

Re: gcc moving memory reference across call

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Richard Guenther wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have some br

Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)

Vincent Lefevre schrieb am 13.10.2008 16:16:38: > On 2008-10-07 21:42:30 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > But is there any "need to upgrade" to 2.3.2 since it would fix a bug > > gcc ran into? > > FYI, GCC can be affected by some bugs in MPFR 2.3.0, amongst the bugs > All these bugs were fixed in

Re: gcc moving memory reference across call

Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Richard Guenther wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have some broken code, compiled from Java source. It looks like: D.8

Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)

On 2008-10-07 21:42:30 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > But is there any "need to upgrade" to 2.3.2 since it would fix a bug > gcc ran into? FYI, GCC can be affected by some bugs in MPFR 2.3.0, amongst the bugs listed on . I think that the bugs in question are:

RE: opt-1.c/opt-2.c ICEs on i686-apple-darwin9

The problem build was at r141079 so perhaps that change could be at fault... Author: hjl Date: Sun Oct 12 21:44:33 2008 New Revision: 141079 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141079 Log: 2008-10-12 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Backport from mainline: 2008-

Re: opt-1.c/opt-2.c ICEs on i686-apple-darwin9

Jack, This is pr37106. It first appeared with -m64 and is now also with -m32. Dominique

opt-1.c/opt-2.c ICEs on i686-apple-darwin9

We have some new regressions on i686-apple-darwin9... FAIL: gcc.target/i386/opt-1.c (internal compiler error) FAIL: gcc.target/i386/opt-1.c (test for excess errors) ERROR: gcc.target/i386/opt-1.c: error executing dg-final: couldn't open "opt-1.s": no such file or directory FAIL: gcc.target/i386

Re: adding ability to scan few local variables in GGC?

Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: I'm not sure to understand the meaning of "MELT GC being incompatible with GGC one". On the contrary, it is designed to be compatible, it is compatble in practice, and it works quite well. If an ggc_collect_with_local scheme is not possible (but I repeat that I

Re: adding ability to scan few local variables in GGC?

Richard Guenther wrote: On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello All, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello All, I am sometimes wishing to be able to scan some few local variab

Re: install path in libgcc Makefile.in

Hi Ho! On Saturday, October 11, 2008, "Zhang Le" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Another problem when cross building the native mips compiler. > I.e. build=x86, host=target=mipsel > I have done some search, but haven't found any related discussion. Please have a look at: http://gcc.gnu.org

Re: adding ability to scan few local variables in GGC?

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello All, > > Andrew Pinski wrote: >> >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Hello All, >>> >>> I am sometimes wishing to be able to scan some few local variab