Go reposrgeon is production ready

2019-10-02 Thread Eric S. Raymond
Today I retired the original Python version of the reposurgeon code. I plan to spend the next couple of days fixing minor bugs that I was deferring until the Go port was finished. Then I'll dive back into the gcc conversion. Barring an emergency on the NTPsec project, I should be able to concen

Re: Adding -Wshadow=local to gcc build rules

2019-10-02 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 9/18/19 3:08 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently trying to add -Wshadow=local to the gcc build rules. > I started with -Wshadow, but gave up that idea immediately. > > As you could expect the current code base has plenty of shadowed > local variables. Most are trivial to resolve

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Uecker, Martin
Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 17:37 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > On October 2, 2019 3:55:43 PM GMT+02:00, "Uecker, Martin" > > wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 15:12 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:10 PM Richard Biener > > > wrote: > > > > ... > > > Oh, an

Re: syncing the GCC vax port, atomic issue

2019-10-02 Thread Segher Boessenkool
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 10:39:23AM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > There are some target hooks in combine that might help here. > targetm.cannot_copy_insn_p and targetm.legitimate_combined_insn. The > former is used more widely than just combine, so you might need to be > careful that

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On October 2, 2019 3:55:43 PM GMT+02:00, "Uecker, Martin" wrote: >Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 15:12 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:10 PM Richard Biener >> wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:35 PM Uecker, Martin >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.1

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Uecker, Martin
Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 15:12 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:10 PM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:35 PM Uecker, Martin > > wrote: > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:10 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:35 PM Uecker, Martin > wrote: > > > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:57 PM Uecker, Martin > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Thank you for your answers. >

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:35 PM Uecker, Martin wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:57 PM Uecker, Martin > > wrote: > > > > > Thank you for your answers. > > > > Finally, how does LTO does it? It somehow also needs to unify > > >

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Uecker, Martin
Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:57 PM Uecker, Martin > wrote: > > Thank you for your answers. > > Finally, how does LTO does it? It somehow also needs to unify > > different tagged types? Could we reuse this mechanism somehow? > > LTO

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:57 PM Uecker, Martin wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 12:47 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:46 PM Richard Biener > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:49 PM Uecker, Martin > > > wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > > In particular, th

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Uecker, Martin
Am Mittwoch, den 02.10.2019, 12:47 +0200 schrieb Richard Biener: > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:46 PM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:49 PM Uecker, Martin > > wrote: ... > > > > > > In particular, the idea is to make structs (+ unions, enums) > > > with the same tag and t

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:46 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:49 PM Uecker, Martin > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I have a proposal for making changes to the rules for > > compatibility of tagged types in C2X (N2366). This was > > received with interest by WG14, so the

Re: compatibility of structs/unions/enums in the middle end

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:49 PM Uecker, Martin wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I have a proposal for making changes to the rules for > compatibility of tagged types in C2X (N2366). This was > received with interest by WG14, so there is a chance > that this could get accepted into C2X. > > In particular, th

Re: Modifying types during optimization

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:43 AM Gary Oblock wrote: > > I'm working on structure reorganization optimizations and one of the > things that needs to happen is that pointers to arrays of structures > need to be modified into either being an integer of a structure depending > on which optimization is r

Re: syncing the GCC vax port, atomic issue

2019-10-02 Thread Richard Earnshaw (lists)
On 01/10/2019 20:43, Jeff Law wrote: On 9/20/19 7:18 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:07:59PM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: Introducing the reversed jbb* patterns doesn't seem to help with the original issue. It crashes building libatomic. My loose understanding of what is go