Re: semantics of uninitialized values in GIMPLE

On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 1:23 AM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc wrote: > > I have implemented support for uninitialized memory in my translation > validator. But I am not sure how well this corresponds to the GIMPLE > semantics, so I have some questions... > > My implementation tracks uninitialized bit

Re: Regarding bypass-asm patch and help in an error during bootstrapped build

Yup, I somehow missed it. Thanks, it is fixed now. Now we can test the addition of.symtab and symbols in both builds. Now I am moving toward the second part of the project, adding debugging information. Right now, I am going through the documentation. Will you recommend any other resources? -- Ri

Re: Stepping down as maintainer for ARC and Epiphany

On 7/5/23 12:43, Joern Rennecke wrote: I haven't worked with these targets in years and can't really do sensible maintenance or reviews of patches for them. I am currently working on optimizations for other ports like RISC-V. ARC has still an active maintainer in Claudiu Zissulescu, so is ba

semantics of uninitialized values in GIMPLE

I have implemented support for uninitialized memory in my translation validator. But I am not sure how well this corresponds to the GIMPLE semantics, so I have some questions... My implementation tracks uninitialized bits. Use of uninitialized bits is in general treated as UB (for example, `x

gcc-11-20230706 is now available

Snapshot gcc-11-20230706 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20230706/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch

user sets ABI

What if the user chooses in own ABI, say specifying a config file like My abi " Parameters = pushed in stack" say gcc -abi "My abi" some.c -o some what would be the problems of specifying an ABI?? would that improve the usage of user? less complex / more simpler for user (say user is used

Re: abi

On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, 22:20 André Albergaria Coelho via Gcc, wrote: > Could gcc have an option to specify ABI? > > say > > > gcc something.c -g -abi 1 -o something > Sure, it could do, but what would it do? What would "-abi 1" mean? Which ABI would it relate to? What are you actually asking about

Re: abi

It does, for machine architectures that have multiple ABIs. MIPS is an example where GCC has supported this for at least 20 years. paul > On Jul 6, 2023, at 5:19 PM, André Albergaria Coelho via Gcc > wrote: > > Could gcc have an option to specify ABI? > > say > > > gcc something.c

abi

Could gcc have an option to specify ABI? say gcc something.c -g -abi 1 -o something thanks andre

Inquiry about SME support for gcov modifications

Hello, My name is Daria Shatalinska and I am a Project Manager at Freelancer. I am contacting you to see if you might be interested in collaborating with us on a project for NASA's Open Innovation Services program (NOIS2). As an awardee of the $175 million NOIS2 contract

Re: [RFC] Bridging the gap between the Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model (LKMM) and C11/C++11 atomics

On Tue, 04 Jul 2023, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 01:19:23PM -0400, Olivier Dion wrote: >> On Mon, 03 Jul 2023, Alan Stern wrote: >> > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 03:20:31PM -0400, Olivier Dion wrote: [...] > Oh, is that it? Then I misunderstood entirely; I thought you were > talking

Re: Regarding bypass-asm patch and help in an error during bootstrapped build

> Hi, > > I have added the patch ( > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/623379.html ) on the > devel/bypass-asm branch. > Although I am able to build using the --disable-bootstrap option but while > doing a bootstrapped build, I am getting these errors ( as warnings while > doing

Re: [RFC] Exposing complex numbers to target backends

From: Richard Biener Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 1:02 PM To: Sylvain Noiry Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org ; Paul Iannetta ; Benoit Dinechin Subject: Re: [RFC] Exposing complex numbers to target backends On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 5:14 PM Sylvain Noiry via Gcc wrote: >> >> H

Regarding bypass-asm patch and help in an error during bootstrapped build

Hi, I have added the patch ( https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/623379.html ) on the devel/bypass-asm branch. Although I am able to build using the --disable-bootstrap option but while doing a bootstrapped build, I am getting these errors ( as warnings while doing the non-bootstra

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 06/07/2023 09:00, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 19:39, David Brown pisze: [--] I'm not sure what this means? At compile time, you only have literals, so what's missing? The compiler knows a lot more than just literal values at compile time - lots of t

Re: [RFC] Exposing complex numbers to target backends

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 5:14 PM Sylvain Noiry via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > > My name is Sylvain, I am an intern at Kalray and I work on improving the GCC > backend for the KVX target. The KVX ISA has dedicated instructions for the > handling of complex numbers, which cannot be selected by GCC due to

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 19:39, David Brown pisze: [--] I'm not sure what this means? At compile time, you only have literals, so what's missing? The compiler knows a lot more than just literal values at compile time - lots of things are "compile-time constants" without being li