Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread H.J. Lu
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "H.J. Lu" >> To: "Hal Finkel" >> Cc: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org >> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:57:36 PM >> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers >>

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread Hal Finkel
- Original Message - > From: "H.J. Lu" > To: "Hal Finkel" > Cc: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:57:36 PM > Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread H.J. Lu
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "H.J. Lu via cfe-dev" >> To: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org >> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 11:27:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers >> >> On T

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread Hal Finkel
- Original Message - > From: "H.J. Lu via cfe-dev" > To: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 11:27:18 AM > Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu > wrote: > > On Tue,

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread H.J. Lu
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:23 PM, John Criswell wrote: > On 9/21/15 4:45 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:52 AM, John Criswell >> wrote: >>> >>> On 9/21/15 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote: On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread John Criswell
On 9/21/15 4:45 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:52 AM, John Criswell wrote: On 9/21/15 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote: On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: To implement interrupt and exception handlers for x86 p

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread H.J. Lu
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:52 AM, John Criswell wrote: > On 9/21/15 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > To implement interrupt and exception handlers for x86 processors, a

Product

2015-09-21 Thread Co.
Customer, One of our customer have just order for more product. This time we need the delivery very urgent. Please see our drawing and design for production. Please kindly send us the following. Delivery time of the Product , product warranty minimum order quantity. Thanks & Best Regards, C

Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread John Criswell
On 9/21/15 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote: On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: To implement interrupt and exception handlers for x86 processors, a compiler should support: 1. void * __builtin_ia32_interrupt_data (void) I got

Re: avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Daniel Gutson
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Daniel Gutson > wrote: >> This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html >> >> Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to >> malloc and a call to memset int

Re: avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Daniel Gutson
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Daniel Gutson wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Daniel Gutson >> wrote: >>> This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html >>> >>> Currently, gcc provides an optimizatio

Re: avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Marc Glisse
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Daniel Gutson wrote: This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to malloc and a call to memset into a call to calloc. This is fine except when it takes place within the calloc() f

Re: avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:26:23AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Daniel Gutson > wrote: > > This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html > > > > Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to > > malloc and a call t

Re: avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Daniel Gutson wrote: > This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html > > Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to > malloc and a call to memset into a call to calloc. > This is fine except when it takes place w

avoiding recursive calls of calloc due to optimization

2015-09-21 Thread Daniel Gutson
This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to malloc and a call to memset into a call to calloc. This is fine except when it takes place within the calloc() function implementation itself, causing a recu

Re: RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-21 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> To implement interrupt and exception handlers for x86 processors, a >>> compiler should support: >>> >>> 1. void * __builtin_ia32_interrupt_data (void) >> >> I got a feedback on the name of this

[commit, spu] Re: [BUILDROBOT] spu: left shift of negative value

2015-09-21 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > I just noticed that (for config_list.mk builds), current GCC errors > out at spu.c, see eg. build > http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/show_build_details.php?id=3D469639 : > > g++ -fno-PIE -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-excep= > tions -fno-rt

Re: Multiprecision Arithmetic Builtins

2015-09-21 Thread Oleg Endo
On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 14:42 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 09/21/2015 08:09 AM, Oleg Endo wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I was thinking of adding some SH specific builtin functions for the > > addc, subc and negc instructions. > > > > Are there any plans to add clang's target independent multipr

Re: Multiprecision Arithmetic Builtins

2015-09-21 Thread Marc Glisse
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Florian Weimer wrote: On 09/21/2015 08:09 AM, Oleg Endo wrote: Hi all, I was thinking of adding some SH specific builtin functions for the addc, subc and negc instructions. Are there any plans to add clang's target independent multiprecision arithmetic builtins (http://cl

Re: Multiprecision Arithmetic Builtins

2015-09-21 Thread Florian Weimer
On 09/21/2015 08:09 AM, Oleg Endo wrote: > Hi all, > > I was thinking of adding some SH specific builtin functions for the > addc, subc and negc instructions. > > Are there any plans to add clang's target independent multiprecision > arithmetic builtins (http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExten

Re: Predictive commoning leads to register to register moves through memory.

2015-09-21 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/18/2015 03:13 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Simon Dardis >> wrote: >>> >>> I've since taken another look at this recently and I've tracked the issue >>> down to >>> tree-predcom.c, specifically ref_at_iter

Re: Optimization bug?

2015-09-21 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 09/20/2015 12:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On September 20, 2015 1:40:12 AM GMT+02:00, Martin Sebor >> wrote: >>> >>> On 09/19/2015 03:32 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote: Hi Andrew, On Sat, 2015-09-19 at 11:34AM -0700,