Re: Zero extractions and zero extends

2010-02-11 Thread Adam Nemet
Jean Christophe Beyler writes: > typedef struct sTestUnsignedChar { > uint64_t a:1; > }STestUnsignedChar; > > uint64_t getU (STestUnsignedChar a) > { > return a.a; > } > > > I get this in the DCE pass : > (insn 6 3 7 2 bitfield2.c:8 (set (subreg:DI (reg:QI 75) 0) > (zero_extract:DI

[C++-0x] Status of constexpr

2010-02-11 Thread Ed Smith-Rowland
Greetings, I have a patch in my tree that employs the constexpr keyword in most of the places in the library where it is required in n3000. This patch bootstraps and causes no new regressions on MacOS at least. I still need test cases. My question is this: Is constexpr in good enough shape

gcc-4.5-20100211 is now available

2010-02-11 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20100211 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20100211/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk

Re: RTL question for I64

2010-02-11 Thread Nathan Froyd
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:43:31AM -0800, Douglas B Rupp wrote: > A pointer would be much appreciated! > > In ia64.md for *cmpdi_normal this is found: > "cmp.%C1 %0, %I0 = %3, %r2" > > Where are %C, %I, %r described? Above gcc/config/ia64/ia64.c:ia64_print_operand. -Nathan

RTL question for I64

2010-02-11 Thread Douglas B Rupp
Greetings, A pointer would be much appreciated! In ia64.md for *cmpdi_normal this is found: "cmp.%C1 %0, %I0 = %3, %r2" Where are %C, %I, %r described? --Doug

Re: Starting an OpenMP parallel section is extremely slow on a hyper-threaded Nehalem

2010-02-11 Thread Edwin Bennink
Thanks Tim, I thought that the gcc list was the most appropriate one regarding the gomp implementation, but I'll post this question on the gcc-help list. By the way, Ubuntu 9.10 is the latest version (dd Oct. 2009). HTT works fine for daily use, but massive parallel applications show some odd

Re: Starting an OpenMP parallel section is extremely slow on a hyper-threaded Nehalem

2010-02-11 Thread Tim Prince
On 2/11/2010 2:00 AM, Edwin Bennink wrote: Dear gcc list, I noticed that starting an OpenMP parallel section takes a significant amount of time on Nehalem cpu's with hyper-threading enabled. If you think a question might be related to gcc, but don't know which forum to use, gcc-help is more

Starting an OpenMP parallel section is extremely slow on a hyper-threaded Nehalem

2010-02-11 Thread Edwin Bennink
Dear gcc list, I noticed that starting an OpenMP parallel section takes a significant amount of time on Nehalem cpu's with hyper-threading enabled. The differences with HTT turned on and off are really huge: - HTT disabled: about 100.000 parallel sections per second - HTT enabled: about 15 pa