Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

On 01/17/2011 10:35 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Jie Zhang wrote: I agree. I think Joseph is the best candidate for the maintainer of the option handling since he made the most changes of gcc/opts-common.c. He is already the maintainer of the driver. If we unify these two maint

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Jie Zhang wrote: > I agree. I think Joseph is the best candidate for the maintainer of the > option handling since he made the most changes of gcc/opts-common.c. He > is already the maintainer of the driver. If we unify these two > maintainerships, we save one line of MAINTA

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

Dear Steering Committee: Is unifying driver and option handling maintainership a good idea? On 01/12/2011 06:14 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: On 01/12/2011 06:07 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Jie Zhang wrote: Dear Steering Committee: The current listed maintainer for op

Re: A question about combining constraints

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Joern Rennecke wrote: Please read the node "Register Classes" in doc/tm.texi . I am sorry , could you please highlight the relevant portion for me? In the pattern that i have given the combination (a,W) satisfies the pattern. But its not matched because i have given then lik

Re: How to tell IRA not to generate invalid insn?

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:38 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:31 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> While working on x32 port, I noticed that match_asm_constraints_1 turns >>> >>> (insn 41 58 46 2 y.i:573 (set (reg/f:SI 98) >>>    

How to tell IRA not to generate invalid insn?

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:38 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:31 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Hi, >> >> While working on x32 port, I noticed that match_asm_constraints_1 turns >> >> (insn 41 58 46 2 y.i:573 (set (reg/f:SI 98) >>        (symbol_ref/f:SI ("*.LC1") [flags 0x2] > 0x7f3dc64880f

Re: Why doesn't match_asm_constraints_1 check constraints?

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:31 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Hi, > > While working on x32 port, I noticed that match_asm_constraints_1 turns > > (insn 41 58 46 2 y.i:573 (set (reg/f:SI 98) >        (symbol_ref/f:SI ("*.LC1") [flags 0x2] 0x7f3dc64880f0>)) 48 {*movsi_1_load_x32} (nil)) > ... > (insn 42 40 43

Why doesn't match_asm_constraints_1 check constraints?

Hi, While working on x32 port, I noticed that match_asm_constraints_1 turns (insn 41 58 46 2 y.i:573 (set (reg/f:SI 98) (symbol_ref/f:SI ("*.LC1") [flags 0x2] )) 48 {*movsi_1_load_x32} (nil)) ... (insn 42 40 43 7 y.i:573 (set (mem/s/f:SI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 20 frame) (const

gcc 4.6 release date

Hi, When do you plan to release gcc 4.6? Thanks -- Mehmet Sinan Şahin

gcc-4.3-20110116 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.3-20110116 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20110116/ 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

bracing errors in gcc/except.c?

-overlength-strings -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../gcc-4.6-20110116/gcc -I../../gcc-4.6-20110116/gcc/. -I../../gcc-4.6-20110116/gcc/../include -I../../gcc-4.6-20110116/gcc/../libcpp/include -I/sw/include -I/sw/include -I../../gcc-4.6-20110116/gcc/../libdecnumber -I../../gcc-4.6

code is not clean. libjava/interpret.cc:1480

libjava/interpret.cc:1480 gcc 4.4.0, 4.4.2 and 4.5.2 have the same problem.

Re: Plus Reload

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Dave Korn wrote: > On 12/01/2011 13:50, Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 01/12/11 01:45, Gidi Nave wrote: >> >>> One more question: >>> GCC usually knows how to handle cases which need decomposition of >>> expressions due to architecture limitations. >>> In my case it didn'