> "Segher" == Segher Boessenkool writes:
Segher> My point was that this should *never* be part of patches, already.
FWIW, I use a few scripts so that I can keep ChangeLogs as files.
That's what I do when working on gdb.
https://github.com/tromey/git-gnu-changelog
This is easier on the whol
Hi!
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:57:43PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > *Nothing* should touch changelog files :-) They should be generated from
> > the
> > VCS. IMHO of course.
>
> IMHO: the VCS should be the changelog.
The VCS shows what changed. The changelog shows what was meant to be
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:33:47AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 06:46 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:54:04AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> > > but trains for GCC Will likely be very short because of Changelog
> > > conflicts.
> >
>
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 06:39:54PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 18:02, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 16:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>All of the above is handled by whomever is responsible for the gcc web
>>>pages. It would be nice if someone fixed th
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 18:02, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 16:46, Christopher Faylor via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> > >Hi Frank,
> > >
> > >> On 23 Apr 2020, at 16:34, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi -
> >
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 16:46, Christopher Faylor via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> >Hi Frank,
> >
> >> On 23 Apr 2020, at 16:34, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi -
> >>
> A re-subscription attempt to the gcc mailing list just
> fai
Hi -
> *Nothing* should touch changelog files :-) They should be generated from the
> VCS. IMHO of course.
IMHO: the VCS should be the changelog.
- FChE
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Olivier Hainque wrote:
>Hi Frank,
>
>> On 23 Apr 2020, at 16:34, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>>
>> Hi -
>>
A re-subscription attempt to the gcc mailing list just
failed, expectedly I guess.
>>
>> I see no sign in the logs of Olivier being banned i
It seems like this discussion doesn't have to be cc'ed to overseers. At
the very least it doesn't need to be cc'ed *twice* as someone who
apparently doesn't understand that gcc.gnu.org == sourceware.org has
cc'ed overseers in both domains.
So, I'd appreciate it if you all would please drop overse
On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 06:46 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:54:04AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> > but trains for GCC Will likely be very short because of Changelog conflicts.
>
> Why that? Your patches should *not* touch changelog files, ever.
>
> For C
On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 09:34 +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 06:49, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Tamar Christina:
> >
> > > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well
> > > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness
> > > guarante
On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 07:41 +0530, Senthil Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:08 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 22:01 +0530, Senthil Kumar via Gcc wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm thinking about attempting to do the CC0 transition for the
> > > AVR port in my spare time. I'v
Hi Frank,
> On 23 Apr 2020, at 16:34, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
>>> A re-subscription attempt to the gcc mailing list just
>>> failed, expectedly I guess.
>
> I see no sign in the logs of Olivier being banned in any form. Please
> resubscribe online and forward complete failure sympt
Hi, thanks for the response, I've given debugging it a try but I cannot
figure out what is causing it to fail. It's probably just my
inexperience. Thanks for the input, it's very much appreciated.
Cheers,
Joe
On 20/04/2020 19:43, Jim Wilson wrote:
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 8:45 AM Joe via Gcc
Hi -
> > A re-subscription attempt to the gcc mailing list just
> > failed, expectedly I guess.
I see no sign in the logs of Olivier being banned in any form. Please
resubscribe online and forward complete failure symptoms if you
believe this is still happening.
- FChE
> On Apr 22, 2020, at 10:11 PM, Senthil Kumar via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:08 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 22:01 +0530, Senthil Kumar via Gcc wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm thinking about attempting to do the CC0 transition for the
>>> AVR port in my spare tim
Hello.
I would like to announce a new Python fork of the C-Reduce tool:
https://github.com/marxin/cvise
I'm going to start with a bit of history and motivation behind the project.
All started 6 years ago when I joined SUSE as a toolchain developer and I
quickly
became a friend with C-Reduce tha
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:56:20PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 12:47, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:54:04AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> > > but trains for GCC Will likely be very short because of Changelog
> > > conflicts.
> >
> > Why th
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 12:47, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:54:04AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> > but trains for GCC Will likely be very short because of Changelog conflicts.
>
> Why that? Your patches should *not* touch changelog files, ever.
>
> For CI it
Hi!
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:54:04AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
> but trains for GCC Will likely be very short because of Changelog conflicts.
Why that? Your patches should *not* touch changelog files, ever.
For CI it is probably easiest if the CI never gets to see the changelog
at all, an
Product: GCC
Component: rtl-optimization
Version: 7.3.0
If we add the flag DO_PREDICATION in scheduling ebb, the compiler will try to
predicate the insn when the producer insn has been issued,
and put the consumer insn into suitable queue. For example as shown in
schedule verbose dump file:
;
On 23/04/2020 11:09, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since April 14 or so, I am not receiving any more messages
> from the gcc or gcc-patches mailing lists.
>
> This turns out to coincide with the date I sent to multiple
> lists the message announcing the unfortunate cancellation of
> the 202
Hello,
Since April 14 or so, I am not receiving any more messages
from the gcc or gcc-patches mailing lists.
This turns out to coincide with the date I sent to multiple
lists the message announcing the unfortunate cancellation of
the 2020 GNU Tools Cauldron.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2
> -Original Message-
> From: Florian Weimer
>
> * Tamar Christina:
>
> > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well
> > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness
> > guarantee. another patch could be approved after mine (with hours in
> > between
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:34:20AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> I've been having problems with it recently, e.g.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e76100ced607218a3bf had to fix a changelog,
> because https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d76925e46fad09fc9be67 put my changelog
> entry in the wrong place in gcc/te
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 06:49, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Tamar Christina:
>
> > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well
> > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness
> > guarantee. another patch could be approved after mine (with hours
> > in between bec
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:47 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Tamar Christina:
>
> > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well
> > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness
> > guarantee. another patch could be approved after mine (with hours
> > in between
> Yes the following is a decent workaround:
> upal_u32be_t tempb;
> memcpy (&tempb, &u, sizeof(uint32_t));
> asm("":"+m"(tempb));
> uint32_t bu = tempb.val;
OK, let me try to do the same in the compiler then.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:41 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > What if we had this:
> > uint32_t u = 0x12345678;
> > upal_u32be_t tempb;
> > memcpy (&tempb, &u, sizeof(uint32_t));
> > uint32_t bu = tempb.val;
> >
> > Is that valid? We still run into the wrong code with the above case
29 matches
Mail list logo
