On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 6:36 PM Martin Uecker wrote:
>
> Am Montag, den 10.01.2022, 10:04 +0100 schrieb Richard Biener:
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 10:09 PM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > > Am Samstag, den 08.01.2022, 10:35 -0800 schrieb Andrew Pinski:
> > > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 12:33 A
Hi everyone,
I intend to work on the static analyzer. Are these documents enough to get
started: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint and
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Analyzer-Internals.html#Analyzer-Internals
.
Thank you.
On Sun, 2022-01-09 at 22:19 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 8:49 PM Andras Tantos > wrote:
> > All!
> >
> > I'm trying to port GCC to a new target, I call 'brew'. I've based
> > it on
> > the Moxie target mostly because of it's simplicity.
> >
> > I must be doing something h
On Mon, 2022-01-10 at 17:13 +0100, FX wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> May I kindly ping you on that? Or anyone with knowledge of the static
> analyzer?
Sorry about the delay in responding; I was on vacation and am still
getting caught up.
Various answers inline below...
>
> Thanks,
> FX
>
>
> > Le 23
Richard,
That's nice to know but I added the option itself months ago.
Also, it's on the lto1 command line, cc1 command line and
shows up in the COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS so I assume
it universally applied.
Thanks,
Gary
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2
Am Montag, den 10.01.2022, 10:04 +0100 schrieb Richard Biener:
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 10:09 PM Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 08.01.2022, 10:35 -0800 schrieb Andrew Pinski:
> > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 12:33 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi Richard,
> > > >
>
Hi David,
May I kindly ping you on that? Or anyone with knowledge of the static analyzer?
Thanks,
FX
> Le 23 déc. 2021 à 22:49, FX a écrit :
>
> Hi David, hi everone,
>
> I’m trying to understand how best to fix or silence the several failures in
> gcc.dg/analyzer that occur on x86_64-apple
* Iain Sandoe:
> In the case that a call is built and no prototype is available, the
> assumption is that all parms are named. The promotion is then done
> according to the C promotion rules.
>
> [for the number of args that can be passed in int regs] the callee
> will happen to observe the same
Hi Florian,
> On 10 Jan 2022, at 08:38, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Jeff Law via Gcc:
>
>> Most targets these days use registers for parameter passing and
>> obviously we can run out of registers on all of them. The key
>> property is the size/alignment of the argument differs depending on if
> On 10 Jan 2022, at 10:46, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> Iain Sandoe writes:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> In the aarch64 Darwin ABI we have an unusual (OK, several unusual) feature
>> of the calling convention.
>>
>> When an argument is passed *in a register* and it is integral and less than
>> SI
Hello,
When below code is compiled with -MF option the Compilation failed when the
path of Windows is more than 256 characters. Do let me know if it is a
feature or a bug in GCC.
Test code in a.c:
int main()
{
int a = 100;
int b = 200;
return a+b;
}
Compilation:
gcc -M -MF
E:\ppc
Status
==
The GCC development branch is open for general bugfixing (Stage 3)
and will transition to regression and documentation fixing only
(Stage 4) on the end of Jan 16th.
Take the quality data below with a big grain of salt - most of the
new P3 classified bugs will become P1 or P2 (genera
Iain Sandoe writes:
> Hi Folks,
>
> In the aarch64 Darwin ABI we have an unusual (OK, several unusual) feature of
> the calling convention.
>
> When an argument is passed *in a register* and it is integral and less than
> SI it is promoted (with appropriate signedness) to SI. This applies when
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 10:09 PM Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
>
> Am Samstag, den 08.01.2022, 10:35 -0800 schrieb Andrew Pinski:
> > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 12:33 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Richard,
> > >
> > > I have a question regarding reodering of volatile
> > > accesse
* Jeff Law via Gcc:
> Most targets these days use registers for parameter passing and
> obviously we can run out of registers on all of them. The key
> property is the size/alignment of the argument differs depending on if
> it's pass in a register (get promoted) or passed in memory (not
> promot
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:12 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> An optimization flag that I recently added is being
> set to zero in push_cfun (which after a couple of
> levels of calls cl_optimization_restore to this.)
>
> The flag defined like this:
>
> finterleaving-index-32-bits
> Common Var(fla
16 matches
Mail list logo
