On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> In: http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/
>>
>> Broken links in the “Documentation” panel on the right:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/specific.html
>> http://www.gnu.org/
On 23 August 2010 19:23, Gareth Randall wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In: http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/
>
> Broken links in the “Documentation” panel on the right:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/specific.html
> http://www.gnu.
On 08/23/2010 11:05 AM, Mohamed Shafi wrote:
> sub.s32 srcdstGP, #imm16 // signed 16-bit register to immediate subtract
> sub.u32 srcdstGP, #imm16 // unsigned 16-bit register to immediate subtract
Having both of these is probably not useful. Bernd pointed
out that a 17-bit constant would be more
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> This is an excellent idea. I just implemented a change to that
> effect and today's snapshot for GCC 4.6 has this:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-08/msg00232.html
>
> I am not really satisfied about how this looks yet and will tweak
> this a bi
On 08/23/2010 08:05 PM, Mohamed Shafi wrote:
> sub.s32 srcdstGP, #imm16 // signed 16-bit register to immediate subtract
> sub.u32 srcdstGP, #imm16 // unsigned 16-bit register to immediate subtract
If you're using a bit to decide between these two, a better encoding
would be to just support a sing
Mohamed Shafi writes:
> I want to know if it is good to have both sign and zero extension for
> 16bit immediate.
Hard to say. It really depends on the kind of constants you expect your
programs to use. It's generally a good idea to have an efficient way to
load small constants which many progr
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Gareth Randall
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In: http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/
This is really a mirror of the main gcc.gnu.org project page.
>
> Broken links in the “Documentation” panel on the right:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
Hi,
In: http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/
Broken links in the “Documentation” panel on the right:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/ (Empty directory)
http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/specific.html
http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/install/test.html
Yours,
--
=== Gareth
Hello all,
I am trying to do a port on GCC 4.5. The target has a memory
resolution of 32bits i.e. char is 32bits in the target (addr 0 selects
1st 32bit and addr 1 selects 2nd 32bit). It has only word (32bit)
access.
In terms of address resolution this target is similar to c4x which
became obsole
writes:
> We are getting the following errors, this happened when we moved from a
> legacy system where everything worked to a newer system. The compiler
> was reinstalled on the newer system and all files were copied. Any help
> will be appreciated.
>
> Qsms using gcc compiler
> QSMS COMPILER -
"Paulo J. Matos" writes:
> However, if I have register constraints that define constraint x to
> match a certain register class X and I define predicate:
> (define_predicate "x_operand"
> (and (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
> (match_test "REGNO_REG_CLASS(REGNO(op)) == X")))
* Wendell Nichols:
> I have some code that passes pointers like:
>
> int foo( int a,char *& word){
> ...
> }
>
> If that function modifies the actual pointer word (indexes it for
> instance) I will get a stack smashing error at runtime. The code runs
> perfectly if I set -fno-stack-protector.
>
>
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Ralf Wildenhues writes:
>
>> Now, to avoid issues when GCC uses newer Libtool: are there situations
>> where running $AR does not work? Cross compile? In-tree binutils?
>
> It doesn't work when you use LTO without gold/linker-plugin.
Sure i
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * H. J. Lu:
>
>> Sometime I have to do
>>
>> int x = 0;
>>
>> to silence gcc from uninitialized warnings when I know it is
>> unnecessary.
>
> I guess the official idiom is
>
> int x = x;
That's what I thought as well, so I am confused.
We are getting the following errors, this happened when we moved from a
legacy system where everything worked to a newer system. The compiler
was reinstalled on the newer system and all files were copied. Any help
will be appreciated.
Qsms using gcc compiler
QSMS COMPILER - VERSION v7.8 (/usr/qtim
I have some code that passes pointers like:
int foo( int a,char *& word){
...
}
If that function modifies the actual pointer word (indexes it for
instance) I will get a stack smashing error at runtime. The code runs
perfectly if I set -fno-stack-protector.
Is this feature intended to work p
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 02:46:21PM +0300, Revital1 Eres wrote:
> I'm compiling the following test with GCC 4.6.0 and I do not see that
> MAX_EXPR is generated for (num)<0)?0:(num).
> With GCC 4.3.2 it is generated OK in original dump (both compilation were
> made with -O3). Is there a flag I shoul
Hello,
I am quite confused with the following from the internals:
; Operand predicates can allow operands that are not actually
; acceptable to the hardware, as long as the constraints give
; reload the ability to fix them up (see Constraints). However,
; GCC will usually generate better code if t
Hello,
I'm compiling the following test with GCC 4.6.0 and I do not see that
MAX_EXPR is generated for (num)<0)?0:(num).
With GCC 4.3.2 it is generated OK in original dump (both compilation were
made with -O3). Is there a flag I should use to generate MAX_EXPR
with GCC 4.6.0?
Thanks,
Revital
#
Ralf Wildenhues writes:
> Now, to avoid issues when GCC uses newer Libtool: are there situations
> where running $AR does not work? Cross compile? In-tree binutils?
It doesn't work when you use LTO without gold/linker-plugin.
-Andi
--
a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
20 matches
Mail list logo
