[I hope this is sufficiently on-topic for the gcc ML: it is likely to be
of interest to people using gcc plugins to do static analysis, and also
touches on gcc output; my apologies if it isn't]
I've been working on running various static analysis tools on a large
subset of the packages in Fedora,
Claves para Obtener Página Web Eficaz
¿Dónde se llevará a cabo?
Lugar: Su computadora.
Fecha: 25 de Febrero de 2013.
Duración: 3 Horas.
Horario: De 10:00 a.m a 1:00 p.m. (Hora del Centro de México).
En la actualidad la función de una página web para una empresa se ha vuelto
crucial para la estra
Hi Martin
/> It seems to me however that PLUGIN_ALL_IPA_PASSES_END runs prior to
trnsformation phase of IPA passes (the name is rather unclear in this
regard)...//
/
If i am not wrong the PLUGIN_ALL_IPA_PASSES_START ( execution ) is hooked in
the begging of
all_smole_ipa_passes , before ALL_SI
On 01/30/2013 04:49 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hmm? GCC generates code that doesn't rely on the extension taking place.
Sure, I didn't mean to suggest it was: it's LLVM that's incorrect.
Thanks for the explanation.
Andrew.
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >>> It's an optimization to do so to avoid partial register stalls.
> >>
> >> Well, it's hardly an optimization if it's incorrect, and it seems to
> >> be incorrect.
Hmm? GCC generates code that doesn't rely on the extension taking place.
> >> As
On 01/30/2013 03:55 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> >
>> > It's incorrect to rely on the extension taking place. It's not incorrect
>> > to
>> > do the extension.
> Sure, I understand that, but I am completely baffled as to how
> extending at a call site avoids partial register stalls if a callee
> c
On 01/30/2013 03:51 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 01/30/2013 03:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
The problem is that LLVM assumes that values are extended at a call. GCC
d
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 01/30/2013 03:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>>
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I'm looking at Sect
On 01/30/2013 03:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>
I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
http://artfiles.org/kernel.or
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>> I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
>>> http://artfiles.org/kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/binutils/hjl/x86-64-psabi.git/
>>>
>>> I
I will inquire with the FSF Copyright Clerk.
- David
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Rainer Emrich
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Maxim,
>
> Am 07.01.2013 08:44, schrieb Maxim Kuvyrkov:
>> On 4/01/2013, at 12:54 AM, Rainer Emrich wrote:
>>> I like to contribute
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Maxim,
Am 07.01.2013 08:44, schrieb Maxim Kuvyrkov:
> On 4/01/2013, at 12:54 AM, Rainer Emrich wrote:
>> I like to contribute some patches to gcc. Therefor im asking kindly for
>> the copyright assignment forms and advice.
>
> Hi Rainer,
>
> You
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
>
> First ,As per the gcc Gimple to RTL conversion ,the RTL insns set
> should be same for the both target ...am i rite here ???...or do i
> miss something here ???
Although you didn't say that the targets are, you said that you had
two differ
Hi,
On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
>> http://artfiles.org/kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/binutils/hjl/x86-64-psabi.git/
>>
>> I still cannot tell whether parameters should or should not be sig
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
> http://artfiles.org/kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/binutils/hjl/x86-64-psabi.git/
>
> I still cannot tell whether parameters should or should not be sign- or
> zero-extended when they are moved into regis
[Resending, this time CC:'d to GCC list.]
I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
http://artfiles.org/kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/binutils/hjl/x86-64-psabi.git/
I still cannot tell whether parameters should or should not be sign- or
zero-extended when they are moved into registers at a call
Dear Group,
Need a favour from you all ,Im very new to gcc framework such and
learning the same ,
I was looking at the RTL insns sets by dumping the c.144.exapnd dump
file before reload pass for the various target and I do see the
difference in the RTL insns set for two different targets for below
17 matches
Mail list logo