On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Rohit Arul Raj wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Rohit Arul Raj
> >> wrote:
> >> > Setting the CCR register is done by a built-in function.
> >
> > Why is this user-controllable?
?
> > My first though
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Rohit Arul Raj wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Rohit Arul Raj
>> wrote:
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > I am working on 32-bit target with gcc 4.6.0. I need some help on the
>> > following:
>> >
>> > For my
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20110816 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20110816/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
The specifications should apply to virtual member functions too --
though the underlying implementation for MVed virtual functions and
virtual calls can be quite different.
David
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am working on supporting function multi-versioni
On 08/15/2011 07:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
I checked this into cilkplus branch. Jason, can you also mirror
branches/cilkplus in GCC git mirror?
Done.
Jason
> * Case II - User Guided Versioning where the function bodies for each
> version differ and is provided by the user.
>
> This case pertains to multi-versioning when the source bodies of the
> two or more versions are different and are provided by the user. Here
> too, I want to use a new attribute
Hi,
I am working on supporting function multi-versioning in GCC and here
is a write-up on its usability.
Multiversioning Usability
For a simple motivating example,
int
find_popcount(unsigned int i)
{
return __builtin_popcount(i);
}
Currently, compiling this with -mpopc
That is exactly it! Thank you very much!
BMI2 support is almost here :)
--
K
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/16/2011 04:20 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> the question is still opened. Let me try to explain further.
>>
>> The new MULX instruction is capa
I think, Ilya, wants to run his pass, say, in 208r.split4 only. Seems
both split2, split3 and split4 all run under `reload_complete` set to
true.
Any ideas?
--
Thanks, K
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there any way to specify in define_split predicate that it should
> work in some particular pass only? I need to create split which works
> in pass_split_before_sched2 only.
So split before RA? try conventionalizing it on !rel
Ramana Radhakrishnan writes:
> I can't see how it is right to construct essentially 2 chains for the
> same register that have overlapping live ranges without an intervening
> conditional branch and since regrename sort of works inside a bb .
> Ideally the chain for 122 should have been terminated
On 08/16/2011 04:20 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hi guys,
> the question is still opened. Let me try to explain further.
>
> The new MULX instruction is capable to store result of unsigned
> multiply to arbitrary pair of GPRs (one of operands still must be DX).
> But I have no idea, how to implement
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> >> Is this OK for trunk?
> >
> > No. You don't need to ping so often; I'll look at it in due course once
> > sufficient time has passed since the last post
Hello,
Is there any way to specify in define_split predicate that it should
work in some particular pass only? I need to create split which works
in pass_split_before_sched2 only.
Thanks
Ilya
Paul Edwards wrote:
> >> Unfortunately it's not quite right, seemingly not loading R9 properly:
> >>
> >> LR9,13
> >> AR9,13
> >> MVC 0(10,9),0(2)
>
> > That's weird. What does the reload dump (.greg) say?
>
> I have trimmed the code down to a reasonably small size so that I
> could pr
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> Is this OK for trunk?
>
> No. You don't need to ping so often; I'll look at it in due course once
> sufficient time has passed since the last posted revision (if a patch
> keeps getting new versions p
Hi guys,
the question is still opened. Let me try to explain further.
The new MULX instruction is capable to store result of unsigned
multiply to arbitrary pair of GPRs (one of operands still must be DX).
But I have no idea, how to implement such a constraint.
Here is define_insn which is works bu
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Laurynas Biveinis
wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:16 PM, 王亮 wrote:
>>> The size it allocates is
>>>
>>> (sizeof (struct rtvec_def) + ((NELT) - 1)) * sizeof (rtx)
>
>>> Originally, the allocated size is
>>>
>>> sizeof (struct rtvec_def) + ((NELT) - 1) * sizeo
Laurynas Biveinis writes:
> 2011/8/15 Andreas Schwab :
>> I think it was meant to be this:
>>
>> #define ggc_alloc_rtvec_sized(NELT) \
>> ggc_alloc_zone_rtvec_def (sizeof (struct rtvec_def) \
>> + ((NELT) - 1) * siz
19 matches
Mail list logo
