On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Nicholas Nethercote
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>>> I used malloc to create my arrays instead of creating the in the stack.
>>> My program is working now but it is very slow.
>>>
>>> I use two-dimensional arrays. The way I acce
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, H.J. Lu wrote:
I used malloc to create my arrays instead of creating the in the stack. My
program is working now but it is very slow.
I use two-dimensional arrays. The way I access element (i,j) is:
array_name[i*row_length+j]
The server that I use has 16GB ram. The ulimit
2008/11/19 Ben Elliston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Following (bit weird ;-) code shows weird case of variadic template
>> function specialization, however I am not sure it is legal, (atleast I
>> haven't found any wording that would prevent such use):
>
> This list is not really the place to discuss l
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Jakub Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quality Data
>
>
> Priority # Change from Last Report
> --- ---
> P1 13 - 4
> P2 114 - 27
> P33 +- 0
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 17:51, Ben Elliston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I assume you mean when running make -jN check-gcc? Concurrency between
> various .exp scripts should not cause you any problems, as each make
> check is run in its own testsuite directory.
Yes. AFAICT, it's intra .exp conc
> I've noticed some spurious failures in the lto tests (g++.dg/lto and
> gcc.dg/lto). They only occur with -jN. The symptom is an error
> message from ld complaining that a .lto.ltrans.o file is missing. I
> think this is a bug in the lto.exp script because the tests work fine
> with -j1.
I ass
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20081119 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20081119/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
> Following (bit weird ;-) code shows weird case of variadic template
> function specialization, however I am not sure it is legal, (atleast I
> haven't found any wording that would prevent such use):
This list is not really the place to discuss language issues (unless you
think you've found a bug
PR 35107 appears to have regressed on mainline. It was originally fixed
on the trunk and 4.3 back in February:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35107
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg00187.html
The summary is that gmp and mpfr and unnecessarily linked into all
executables
I'm getting the following failure on powerpc64-apple-darwin9.5.0:
Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to :/Users/lucier/programs/gcc/objdirs/
mainline/gcc:/Users/lucier/programs/gcc/objdirs/mainline/powerpc64-
apple-darwin9.5.0/./libstdc++-v3/src/.libs::/Users/lucier/programs/gcc/
objdirs/mainline/gcc:/Us
"mal reddy y" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am getting libmudflap crash test failures like this,
> any help will be appreciated.
> [...]
> FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail1-frag.c crash test
> FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail10-frag.c crash test
> FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail11-frag.c crash test
> [...]
All these tes
Hello,
Please consider this little snippett of code:
- 8< -- 8< --
#define AU1000_INTC0_INT_BASE 8
#define IC0_FALLINGCLR 0xb0400078
#define IC0_RISINGCLR 0xb040007c
static inline void au_writel(unsigned long d, unsigned long a)
{
*(unsigned long *)(a) =
Please ignore previous email. I had modified some path in the output
(for any possible violations of any kind)
But looks like i overlooked some of them. This has all paths correct.
checking for ld used by /mnt/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/./gcc/
-B/usr/local/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/bin/
-B/usr/local/powerpc-
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM, David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM, David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> You can test -ftree-parallelize-loops building GCC with an insta
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM, David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can test -ftree-parallelize-loops building GCC with an installed version
> of GCC, but not as a three-stage bootstrap.
Except you can change libgomp into a target library that gets
bootstrapped though. Just like lib
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM, David Edelsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You can test -ftree-parallelize-loops building GCC with an installed version
>> of GCC, but not as a three-stage bootstrap.
>
> Except you can c
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Razya Ladelsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can I build the target libraries without libgomp, and enable
> parallelization only from stage2?
The target libraries (libfortran, libstdc++, libgomp, etc.) are built
after all of the
compiler languages are built -- all
checking for ld used by /mnt/./gcc/xgcc -B/CDRTest/jay/./gcc/
-B/usr/local/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/bin/
-B/usr/local/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/lib/ -isys
tem /usr/local/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/include -isystem
/usr/local/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/sys-include... (cached)
/mnt/test/./gcc/collect-ld
checking
Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi Jeffrey,
I'm seeing a few performance regressions similar to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32306 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315 in a port where I'm
working off the 4.3 branch. These regressions are caused by the
decision to stop
I've noticed some spurious failures in the lto tests (g++.dg/lto and
gcc.dg/lto). They only occur with -jN. The symptom is an error
message from ld complaining that a .lto.ltrans.o file is missing. I
think this is a bug in the lto.exp script because the tests work fine
with -j1.
I'll be taking
Hi Jeffrey,
I'm seeing a few performance regressions similar to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32306 and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33315 in a port where I'm
working off the 4.3 branch. These regressions are caused by the
decision to stop iterating DOM on identifying
"David Edelsohn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/11/2008 18:45:06:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Razya Ladelsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to bootstrap with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4 enabled
(passed as
> > BOOTCFLAGS).
> > I'm failing at the begining of stage2 b
Hi all,
I am getting libmudflap crash test failures like this,
any help will be appreciated.
FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail1-frag.c crash test
FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail10-frag.c crash test
FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail11-frag.c crash test
FAIL: libmudflap.c/fail12-frag.c crash test
FAIL: libmudflap.c/f
23 matches
Mail list logo
