I'm stuck on generating a jmp to the epilogue as I can't find any
examples of this. This is the summarized version of what I'm doing:
rtx msabi_restore_fn, jump_insn;
msabi_restore_fn = gen_rtx_SYMBOL_REF (Pmode, "__msabi_restore");
SYMBOL_REF_FLAGS (msabi_restore_fn) |= SYMBOL_FLAG_LOCAL;
jump
On 08/15/2016 05:46 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 08/14/2016 08:23 AM, Daniel Santos wrote:
ms_abi_push_regs:
pop%rax
push %rdi
push %rsi
sub$0xa8,%rsp
movaps %xmm6,(%rsp)
movaps %xmm7,0x10(%rsp)
movaps %xmm8,0x20(%rsp)
movaps %xmm9,0x30(%rsp)
mova
On 08/16/2016 03:10 AM, shmuel gutl wrote:
My hardware directly supports instructions of the form
subreg:SI(reg:VEC v1,3) = SI:a1
Subregs of hard registers should be avoided. They are primarily useful
for pseudo regs. Subregs that aren't lowpart subregs should be avoided
also. Except w
Hi,
If I run configure with "--program-suffix=6", I get gcc6, gfortran6, etc.
When ldd looks for libgcc.so.1 on FreeBSD, she finds the wrong one.
% cat foo.f90
program foo
print *, 'Hello'
end program
% gfortran6 -o z foo.f90 && ./z
/lib/libgcc_s.so.1: version GCC_4.6.0 required by \
/usr/loca
In your example the compiler is not given the guarantee that
the object 'foo' in question can only be modified through the pointer.
We can make such guarantee by adding the `restrict` qualifier
to the pointer, like this:
const int *restrict pfoo = &foo;
With -O3 on GCC 6.1 the modified code
On 17/08/16 02:21, Toshi Morita wrote:
I was involved in a discussion over the semantics of "const" in C, and the
following code was posted:
#include
int foo = 0;
const int *pfoo = &foo;
void bar (void)
{
foo +=3D;
I assume that's a typo?
}
int main(void)
{
int a, b;
a = *pfoo
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Am 16.08.2016 um 20:57 schrieb Richard Biener:
>>
>> On August 16, 2016 7:11:26 PM GMT+02:00, Thomas Koenig
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> What would it take to use an LTO-enabled version of gfortran?
>>>
>>> It could turn out to be quite useful for spee
