Re: ICE building a libsupc++ file, pdp11 target

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Koning
> On Jul 17, 2018, at 9:36 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 3:08 PM Paul Koning wrote: >> >> >>> On Jul 17, 2018, at 5:46 AM, Richard Biener >>> wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> There is not enough information for anyone to help you without >>> reproducing the issue w

Re: Building with old gcc

2018-10-09 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, On 09/10/18 15:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 14:30, Paul Koning wrote: I'm trying to build the current code on Linux with GCC 4.3.2 (stock compiler in Fedora 10 which is my old test system). It fails like this: In file included from /mnt/hgfs/pkoning/Documents/svn/gc

Re: Building with old gcc

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 3:33 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 14:30, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > I'm trying to build the current code on Linux with GCC 4.3.2 (stock > > compiler in Fedora 10 which is my old test system). It fails like this: > > > > In file included from > > /m

Re: Building with old gcc

2018-10-09 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 14:30, Paul Koning wrote: > > I'm trying to build the current code on Linux with GCC 4.3.2 (stock compiler > in Fedora 10 which is my old test system). It fails like this: > > In file included from > /mnt/hgfs/pkoning/Documents/svn/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.h:27, >

Building with old gcc

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Koning
I'm trying to build the current code on Linux with GCC 4.3.2 (stock compiler in Fedora 10 which is my old test system). It fails like this: In file included from /mnt/hgfs/pkoning/Documents/svn/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.h:27, from /mnt/hgfs/pkoning/Documents/svn/gcc/gcc/gimple-loo

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:53 PM Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > > > It was repeatedly suggested that we _could_ derive alignment info from > > function parameter types since we rely on precise typing there for example > > for points-to analysis (albeit only for r

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Joseph Myers
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > It was repeatedly suggested that we _could_ derive alignment info from > function parameter types since we rely on precise typing there for example > for points-to analysis (albeit only for restrict qualification processing and > for DECL_BY_REFERENCE "p

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:23 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 11:08:44AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:00 AM Alexander Monakov > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > > then we cannot set the alignment of i_1

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 11:08:44AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:00 AM Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > then we cannot set the alignment of i_1 at/after k = *i_1 because doing > > > so would > > > affect the alignmen

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:00 AM Alexander Monakov wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > then we cannot set the alignment of i_1 at/after k = *i_1 because doing so > > would > > affect the alignment test which we'd then optimize away. We'd need to > > introduce > > a SSA c

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > > then we cannot set the alignment of i_1 at/after k = *i_1 because doing so > would > affect the alignment test which we'd then optimize away. We'd need to > introduce > a SSA copy to get a new SSA name but that would be optimized away quickly. We p

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Eric Botcazou
> It was repeatedly suggested that we _could_ derive alignment info from > function parameter types since we rely on precise typing there for example > for points-to analysis (albeit only for restrict qualification processing > and for DECL_BY_REFERENCE "pointers"). That would fix the simple testc

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:02 AM Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 10/08/2018 07:38 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > > >> On Oct 8, 2018, at 1:29 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > >> > >> On 10/08/2018 06:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > >>> Only if you somewhere visibly add accesses to *i and *j. Without them you >

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:41 AM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > It's not quite obvious what SSE has to do with this - any hint please? > > SSE introduced alignment constraints into the non-strict-alignment target x86 > so people didn't really want to play by the rules of strict-alignment targets. Yeah.

Re: movmem pattern and missed alignment

2018-10-09 Thread Andrew Haley
On 10/08/2018 07:38 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > >> On Oct 8, 2018, at 1:29 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 10/08/2018 06:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote: >>> Only if you somewhere visibly add accesses to *i and *j. Without them you >>> only have the "accesses" via memcpy, and as Richi says, those do