Memory dependence

2013-06-10 Thread shmeel gutl
In the architecture that I am using, there is a big pipeline penalty for read after write to the same memory location. Is it possible to tell the difference between a possible memory conflict and a definite memory conflict?

Re: lower-subreg and IBM long double

2013-06-10 Thread Alan Modra
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 06:31:55PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > > > >> The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode, > >> bootstrap and regression tests are OK, b

Re: lower-subreg and IBM long double

2013-06-10 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > >> The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode, >> bootstrap and regression tests are OK, but I'm a little unsure whether >> this is the right thing to do. >> >>

Re: lower-subreg and IBM long double

2013-06-10 Thread David Edelsohn
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > The following patch disables lower-subreg for double double TFmode, > bootstrap and regression tests are OK, but I'm a little unsure whether > this is the right thing to do. > > * rs6000.c (TARGET_INIT_LOWER_SUBREG): Define. > (

aprovechas las mejores ofertas

2013-06-10 Thread info
si te gusta la fortuna de san carlos. dale me gusta a nuestro sitio en fb https://www.facebook.com/fortunacostarica?ref=tn_tnmn La Fortuna Costa Rica aqui estaremos publicando las mejores ofertas, t

aprovechas las mejores ofertas

2013-06-10 Thread info
si te gusta la fortuna de san carlos. dale me gusta a nuestro sitio en fb https://www.facebook.com/fortunacostarica?ref=tn_tnmn La Fortuna Costa Rica aqui estaremos publicando las mejores ofertas, t

lower-subreg and IBM long double

2013-06-10 Thread Alan Modra
Should lower-subreg be disabled for IBM long double TFmode? On powerpc64-linux, this testcase long double ld_abs (long double x) { return __builtin_fabsl (x); } compiled with -m64 -O2 -S generates the horrible code shown on the left. The code on the right is ideal, as generated by gcc-4.2. We

Re: [RS6000] strict alignment for little-endian

2013-06-10 Thread Michael Meissner
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:54:39AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > I'd like to remove -mstrict-align for little-endian powerpc, because > the assumption that mis-aligned accesses are massively slow isn't true > for current powerpc processors. However I also don't want to break > old machines, so probab

Re: 4.8.1 fails to build on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

2013-06-10 Thread Jonathan Wakely
I've just noticed this mail was sent to the gcc@ list, which is for development of GCC itself. For help using and installing GCC please use the gcc-help@ list instead, see http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html

Re: 4.8.1 fails to build on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

2013-06-10 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 10 June 2013 16:59, Piotr Wyderski wrote: > I have a set of the required libraries built and installed into > separate directories, so when gcc is configured with: > > ../configure --prefix=/opt/tools/gcc-4.8.1 > --with-gmp=/opt/tools/gmp-5.1.2 --with-mpfr=/opt/tools/mpfr-3.2.1 > --with-mpc=/opt

4.8.1 fails to build on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

2013-06-10 Thread Piotr Wyderski
I have a set of the required libraries built and installed into separate directories, so when gcc is configured with: ../configure --prefix=/opt/tools/gcc-4.8.1 --with-gmp=/opt/tools/gmp-5.1.2 --with-mpfr=/opt/tools/mpfr-3.2.1 --with-mpc=/opt/tools/mfr=/opt/tools/mpfr-3.2.1 --with-mpc=/opt/tools/m

Internal compiler error with -O2 and optimize("O0")

2013-06-10 Thread Aleksandr Platonov
ow_bug.cgi?id=57358 comment #2) but no responses there. Could anybody take a look at this? This problem appears in 4.8.0 version and still observed in latest gcc sources (4.9.0 20130610 (experimental)) -- Aleksandr Platonov