Hi,
I've recently been using a target (e200z6) where a "-mno-spe
-mabi=no-spe" libgcc was required.
The closest combination provided by 4.9.1 was "-mno-spe -mabi=no-spe
-mno-isel". My builds disable spe, but leave isel enabled.
Unfortunately, with this combination of options gcc uses an inco
On 09/09/2014 06:05 PM, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have a patch which I need to submit. Maybe by Friday I will do that. It
> fixes the kernel on arm64 but it is generic c front-end patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg01146.html fixed kernel
miscompilation for me. The second iss
Sounds a good idea to me, here is the list I'm using:
#include "params.h"
#include "flags.h"
#include "tree.h"
#include "tree-pass.h"
#include "basic-block.h"
#include "function.h"
#include "hash-table.h"
#include "tree-ssa-alias.h"
#include "tree-cfg.h"
#include "tree-ssa-operands.h"
#include "tre
On 09/15/2014 11:55 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-06/msg00116.html)
From the __builtin_object_size documentation, it's not immediately
clear to me whether this is supposed to work or not:
If the least significant
bit is clear, objects are whole variables, if
During the re-architecture session at Cauldron, I mentioned the
possibility of introducing a plugin-headers.h.
This would be a file which plugins could use which would protect them
somewhat from header file restructuring. The idea is that it includes
all the common things plugins need, (like
On Sep 15, 2014, at 9:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
All the updates sound good.
> Regtested on x86_64-linux, without the patch toplevel make -k check
> took 8hrs3minutes (don't have time data for that run),
This confuses me, but, no matter. Isn’t 8hrs time data? :-)
> patch toplevel make -j48
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 04:42:25PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Here is my latest version of the patch.
>
> I did a timing test:
Here is an updated version.
Changes since last version:
1) acats parallelized the same way (just, because it is in
Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 09/15/2014 11:21 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 07:37:50PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> >>> the following C++ test case:
> >>>
> >>> struct pollfd
> >>>{
> >>> int fd;
> >>> short int events;
> >>> short
On 09/15/2014 11:21 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 07:37:50PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
the following C++ test case:
struct pollfd
{
int fd;
short int events;
short int revents;
};
struct Pollfd : public pollfd { };
struct Pollf
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 05:21:50PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > The thing is that the C++ FE transforms this kind of cast to
> > &((struct Pollfd *) &myfd)->D.2233
> > so for middle-end where __builtin_object_size is evaluated this
> > is like:
> > struct Pollfd { struct pollfd something; };
>
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 07:37:50PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > the following C++ test case:
> >
> > struct pollfd
> > {
> > int fd;
> > short int events;
> > short int revents;
> > };
> >
> > struct Pollfd : public pollfd { };
> >
> > struct Pollfd myf
I am trying to access the body of a constructor.
My pass is hooked after pass_ipa_pta.
Constructor for a class is invoked as :
__comp_ctor (&b);
However the constructor body is dumped as
__base_ctor (struct B * const this)
{
:
}
I am not able to access basic blocks f
On 14 September 2014 20:03, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Frédéric Buclin writes:
>
>> Could one of you give me a short and clear description of each of the
>> Host, Target and Build fields used in GCC Bugzilla?
>
> It's the same as what you pass to configure as --build, --host, --target.
i.e. Build i
13 matches
Mail list logo
