Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:49 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:24 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:06 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > >On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Ju

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:49 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:24 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:06 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > >On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, Ju

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:24 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:06 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu wrote: > > >On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Jun 17,

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:06 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:38 PM Fangrui Song wrote: > >> > > > >> > > On 2021-0

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:38 PM Fangrui Song wrote: > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu via llvm-dev wrote: > > >On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote:

Re: Build failure due to format-truncation

On 6/17/21 5:04 PM, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote: On 17/06/21 20:51, Martin Sebor wrote: What stage does this happens in, and if stage 1, what is the system compiler? > I am not sure if this happens also in the earlier stages, I would have to do a complete rebuild and that would take so

Re: Build failure due to format-truncation

On 17/06/21 20:51, Martin Sebor wrote: What stage does this happens in, and if stage 1, what is the system compiler? > I am not sure if this happens also in the earlier stages, I would have to do a complete rebuild and that would take some time. I have built gcc using an altered "opts.c" so

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:25 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:38 PM Fangrui Song wrote: > > > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu via llvm-dev wrote: > > > >On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On

gcc-9-20210617 is now available

Snapshot gcc-9-20210617 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20210617/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch

Re: Build failure due to format-truncation

On 6/16/21 6:26 PM, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote: On 16/06/21 20:37, Martin Sebor wrote: I don't really think the warning is doing anything wrong I completely agree. I am not complaining about the warning, I am complaining that there is code in gcc which raises this warning and breaks t

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:46 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:38 PM Fangrui Song wrote: > > > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu via llvm-dev wrote: > > >On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 9:06 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > >> > > > >> > 1. GNU_P

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:38 PM Fangrui Song wrote: > > On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu via llvm-dev wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 9:06 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > > >> > 1. GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_LO..GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_HI > >> > > >> > #d

Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On 2021-06-17, H.J. Lu via llvm-dev wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 9:06 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > 1. GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_LO..GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_HI > > #define GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_LO 0xb000 > #define GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_HI 0xb00

Re: RFC: Add GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_XXX/GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_OR_XXX

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:02 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 9:06 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > 1. GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_LO..GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_HI > > > > #define GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_LO 0xb000 > > #define GNU_PROPERTY_UINT32_AND_HI 0xb0007fff > > > > A bit in the output

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On 6/17/21 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:33, Martin Sebor wrote: On 6/17/21 9:11 AM, Michael Matz wrote: Hello, On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: The original problem is that the PR wasn't _in the body_ of the commit But I see [PR100085] right

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:14 PM Joseph Myers wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Richard Earnshaw via Gcc wrote: > > > It seems a bit dangerous to me to rely on just extracting PR numbers from > > tests. What if the patch is just adjusting a test to make it compatible > with > > the remainder of the c

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 05:12:52PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Richard Earnshaw via Gcc wrote: > > > It seems a bit dangerous to me to rely on just extracting PR numbers from > > tests. What if the patch is just adjusting a test to make it compatible > > with > > the remain

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Richard Earnshaw via Gcc wrote: > It seems a bit dangerous to me to rely on just extracting PR numbers from > tests. What if the patch is just adjusting a test to make it compatible with > the remainder of the change? Also, that a test is added for a PR, or a commit is relev

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:33, Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 6/17/21 9:11 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: > > > >>> The original problem is that the PR wasn't _in the body_ of the commit > >> > >> But I see [PR100085] right there at the end o

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 09:33:06AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 6/17/21 9:11 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: > > > > > > The original problem is that the PR wasn't _in the body_ of the commit > > > > > > But I see [PR100085] right th

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On 6/17/21 9:11 AM, Michael Matz wrote: Hello, On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: The original problem is that the PR wasn't _in the body_ of the commit But I see [PR100085] right there at the end of the _summary line_: Emphasis mine. Let me make sure I understand: we ask u

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

Hello, On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: > > The original problem is that the PR wasn't _in the body_ of the commit > > But I see [PR100085] right there at the end of the _summary line_: Emphasis mine. Ciao, Michael.

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On 6/17/21 4:18 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 02:01, Martin Sebor wrote: On 6/16/21 6:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 6/16/21 8:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: 3) adds the PR component/n to each ChangeLog This would be reverting the r12-771 change, which seems both unrelat

Re: Difficulties in merging patterns

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:21:05PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > but the difficulty is in the (const_int ..) operand to (vec_merge ..). > > I've tried sth like > > > > (define_mode_attr addsub_cst [(V4DF "(const_int 5)") (V2DF "(const_int > > 1)") >

GCC, standard library functions/builtins and POSIX conformance

The GCC manual says: If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as GCC does not provide one. The GNU C library (called 'glibc') provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports other

Re: Difficulties in merging patterns

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:21:05PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > but the difficulty is in the (const_int ..) operand to (vec_merge ..). > I've tried sth like > > (define_mode_attr addsub_cst [(V4DF "(const_int 5)") (V2DF "(const_int > 1)") > (V4SF "(const_int 5)") (

Difficulties in merging patterns

I'm trying to merge (define_insn "avx_addsubv4df3" [(set (match_operand:V4DF 0 "register_operand" "=x") (vec_merge:V4DF (minus:V4DF (match_operand:V4DF 1 "register_operand" "x") (match_operand:V4DF 2 "nonimmediate_operand" "xm")) (plus:V4DF (

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 02:01, Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 6/16/21 6:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On 6/16/21 8:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > >> 3) adds the PR component/n to each ChangeLog > > > > This would be reverting the r12-771 change, which seems both unrelated > > and undesirable. > > No

Re: git gcc-commit-mklog doesn't extract PR number to ChangeLog

On 17/06/2021 01:40, Jason Merrill via Gcc wrote: On 6/16/21 8:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 6/16/21 5:45 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 5:46 PM Martin Sebor > wrote:     On 6/16/21 2:49 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 6/15/21 11:42 PM, Jason Me

Re: docs: Unification of "enabled by default at -O{,1}

On 6/16/21 7:13 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 6/11/21 6:53 AM, Martin Liška wrote: Hello. First, note that -O is equal to -O1 :) I noticed we don't use it consistently in documentation: $ git grep 'at.*-O1}' | cat gcc/ada/gnat_ugn.texi:pick it based on the optimization level: 1 for @code{-O1},

Re: Aldy Hernandez and Andrew MacLeod as VRP maintainers

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc wrote: > On 6/17/21 12:18 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >> I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed Aldy >> Hernandez and Ian MacLeod as maintainers for the VRP subsystem (EVRP, VRP, >> Ranger). > I don't know who this Ian is, but I'm

Re: Aldy Hernandez and Andrew MacLeod as VRP maintainers

On 6/17/21 12:18 AM, Jeff Law wrote: I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed Aldy Hernandez and Ian MacLeod as maintainers for the VRP subsystem (EVRP, VRP, Ranger). I don't know who this Ian is, but I'm sure we'll get along splendidly :). Aldy/Andrew, pleas