ht to be
a pop-up warning you against doing this (I'm not sure why it didn't show
up).
Please use a specific architecture e.g. `-march=skylake-avx512` -
https://godbolt.org/z/GvTcqasqK
Thanks, Matt :)
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:47 AM Qwert Nerdish via Gcc
wrote:
> Correct link i
On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 3:52 PM Joseph Myers via Gdb
wrote:
>
> 1. Introduction
>
> This message expands on my remarks at the Cauldron (especially the
> patch review and maintenance BoF, and the Sourceware infrastructure
> BoF) regarding desired features for a system providing pull request
> func
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 5:38 PM Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> > [...] I suggest that a basic principle for such a system is that it
> > should be *easy* to obtain and maintain a local copy of the history
> > of all pull requests. That includes all versions of a pull request,
> > if it get
Ok! Thanks; sorry for the misunderstanding on my side.
--matt
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 2:53 PM Stefan Kanthak
wrote:
> Matt Godbolt wrote:
>
> > I believe your example doesn't take into account that the values can be
> NaN
> > which compares false in all situatio
I believe your example doesn't take into account that the values can be NaN
which compares false in all situations. If you allow the compiler to
optimize without supporting NaN (-ffast-math), I think it generates the
code you want: https://godbolt.org/z/1ra7zcsnd
--matt
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021
Hi,
I Just want to confirm that did you got my last email or not.
If you find this interesting and want to know more about it , share your
details with us our experts will get in touch and share further details
with you.
I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Matt Prater
On Thu, Jul 8
ate_operand" "=r,d ,q,r")
(match_operand:ALL1 1 "nox_general_operand" "r,n Ynn,r,q"))
(clobber (const_int 0))]
"(register_operand (operands[0], mode)
|| reg_or_0_operand (operands[1], mode))
&& reload_completed"
{
return output_movqi (insn, operands, NULL);
}
[(set_attr "length" "1,1,1,1")
(set_attr "adjust_len" "mov8")])
Regards
Senthil
Happy to see someone working this. Are you starting with one CC mode?
I noticed that the current CC0 implementation seems to effectively use
several modes. For example, one for use of the t flag. I'm sure it
will be easier
to start with one mode.
Matt
is a reference to the discussion on avrfreaks.net:
https://www.avrfreaks.net/forum/avr-gcc-and-avr-g-are-deprecated-now
Matt
I'd like to tell gcc that it's okay to inline functions (such as
rintf(), to get the SSE4.1 roundss instruction) at particular call
sights without compiling the entire source file or calling function
with different CFLAGS.
I attempted this by making inline wrapper functions annotated with
attribut
during configuration. Combined with
building libiberty with "-fno-builtin-stpcpy" (PR 66014), I have
gotten all builds to finally succeed. I could use some guidance on
where to go from here, however.
Thanks,
Matt
rocessed due to #1.
This is my first report so I wouldn't mind some guidance. I'm
familiar enough with debugging to gather whatever other level details
are requested. Most of this was found using gdb.
--
Matt Breedlove
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:53 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Matt Godbolt writes:
>> GCC's code generation uses a "load; add; store" for volatiles, instead
>> of a single "add 1, [metric]".
>
> GCC doesn't know if a target's load/add/store
three instructions to be a single
increment in the case of x86 given relaxed memory ordering, I can
offer no good opinion (though my instinct is it should be able to be!)
Thanks all for your help, Matt
n this case you now know: it's a bug! But one that it's
>fairly hard to care deeply about, although it might get fixed now.
Understood completely! Thanks again,
Matt
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 27/12/14 00:02, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 26/12/14 22:49, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:20 PM, NightStrike wrote:
> Have you tried release and acquire/consume instead?
Yes; these emit the same instructions in this case. http://goo.gl/e94Ya7
Regards, Matt
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 26/12/14 22:49, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 26/12/14 20:32, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>> I realise my understanding could be wrong here!
>> If not though, b
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50677
Thanks Marc
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 26/12/14 20:32, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>> Is there a reason why (in principal) the volatile increment can't be
>> made into a single add? Clang and ICC both emit the same code for the
>> volatile and non-volatile cas
the example (which is also at the bottom of my email).
Is there a reason why (in principal) the volatile increment can't be
made into a single add? Clang and ICC both emit the same code for the
volatile and non-volatile case.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts on the matter,
Matt
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> Please file a bug with a test case. No need to worry about the phase
> too much initially, just fill in a reasonable component.
>
Thanks - filed as https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64396
-matt
http://goo.gl/fi3p2J
ICC 13.0.1: http://goo.gl/PRTTc6
Clang 3.4.1: http://goo.gl/95JEQc
I'll happily file a bug if necessary but I'm not clear in what phase
the optimization opportunity has been missed.
Thanks all, Matt
On Aug 31, 2014, at 11:32 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am writing some code and found that system crashed. I found it was
>> unaligned access which causes `data abort` exception. I write a piece
>> of code and objdump
>> it. I am not sure this is right or not.
>>
>> command:
>> arm-
On May 30, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/25/14 18:19, Matt Thomas wrote:
>>
>> But even if movhi is a define_expand, as far as I can tell there's
>> isn't enough info to know whether that is possible. At that time,
>> how can I tell t
GCC 4.8 for VAX is generating a subreg:HI for mem:SI indexed address. This
eventually gets caught by an assert in change_address_1. Since the MEM rtx is
SI, legimate_address_p thinks it's fine.
I have a change to vax.md which catches these but it's extremely ugly and I
have to think there'
I'm looking into http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58901
and trying to find where the following rtx is being generated:
(subreg:HI (mem/u/c:SI (plus:SI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 0 %r0 [orig:77 count ] [77])
(const_int 4 [0x4]))
(symbol_ref:SI ("DECPOWERS") [flags 0x
On Fri, 2013-03-29 at 06:13 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Matt Burgess
> wrote:
> >
> > 1) We currently assume that binutils is 'upstream' for libiberty
> > development, and should therefore 'own' the libiberty.a fi
suppress installation of the
archive as well as the headers? If so, is the fact that it doesn't a
GCC bug or a binutils bug (if the assumption in 1. above holds, I'd also
assume that the copy of libiberty in GCC's source tree is taken verbatim
from there, and therefore this is a binu
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Matt Godbolt wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the quick reply. I definitely have --enable-shared set in
>> the configuration, and had so with 4.7. However I'm not certain that
>&g
shared and see if that works. What
does this flag do: I couldn't find any reference to it on
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/configure.html or in
./configure --help - I must have picked it up from the seed set of
configure options I cribbed from the Ubuntu-built gcc.
Thanks, Ma
e in ${BINUTILS_FILES}
do
if [ ! -e "$file" ]
then
ln -sf "../${BINUTILS_DIR}/${file}"
fi
done
popd
Any pointers welcomed, and I'd be happy to supply even more information.
Much appreciated, Matt
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 22:54, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a particular instance of a
>> function call within a function that I am analyzing (and
>> transforming). I want the address of that function call, for
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:54:39PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 01:51:04PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> >>
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 01:51:04PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a GIMPLE_CALL gimple object. I want to get the tree node
>> representing the callsite for this particular instance of a call, how
>> can I
I have a GIMPLE_CALL gimple object. I want to get the tree node
representing the callsite for this particular instance of a call, how
can I get this information?
-Matt
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I have a GIMPLE_CALL statement and I want to mark the left-hand-side
>> value as being addressable (mark_addressable()). I am trying to force
>> the result to be sto
return of a
caller to be stored on the stack, in a temporary variable, instead of
lying around in a register, or being passed to other free registers?
-Matt
I NEED A DRIVER FOR MY WIFE
I just wanted to post an update, mainly that I have solved my problem
:-) A bit more on this follows below...
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Thanks Ian, Richard.
> I have some modified code which seems to be along the same lines as
> what you all suggested. Howe
, Feb 1, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have a routine that creates a local array containing pointers to
>> global data. At runtime, when this array is passed to a function, I
>> do not see the poi
decl = create_tmp_var(type, "testarray");
DECL_INITIAL(decl) = build_constructor(type, entries);
return decl;
}
Do I have to explicitly create assignment statements for each element,
since my array is local? As I mention above, if I make my array
global, everything is fine.
-Matt
Thanks Ian,
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> This question is similar to my last; however, I think it provides a
>> bit more clarity as to how I am obtaining offsets from the frame
>> pointer
rtx. Since these variables are local, the RTL
expression reflects an offset from the stack frame pointer. For
instance, the variable 'matt':
(mem/f/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 20 frame)
(const_int -8 [0xfff8])) [0 matt+0 S8 A64])
I interpret this as being -8 bytes awa
expression that
represents my variable, is sometimes 2 words off?
Thanks!
-Matt
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your reply.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:16 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>>
>> I have a GIMPLE pass and would like to make use of the data type
>> information that the Go frontend produces. Is there a
Hello,
I have a GIMPLE pass and would like to make use of the data type
information that the Go frontend produces. Is there a way to access
this information from the middle end without having to query the
frontend?
-Matt
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Matt Turner wrote:
>
>> I say this mail http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-01/msg00063.html
>> suggesting the addition of a --multilib= configure option. Has such a
>> thing been added? Is there a
:67 (gcc-4.7.1), as the type is
unreachable. The unreachable being the decl, instance of the member.
Should both the member and members array be DECL nodes that have their
DECL_INITIAL field set to the respected results from calling
build_constructor() for the member instance and members array?
-Matt
gsi_one_before_end_p on that call statement is returning 'false'
(which seems correct since it is no longer the last statement in that
block) and the compiler assert is triggered. Any insight would be
appreciated, thanks.
-Matt
So no one wastes time looking into this
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> In my compiler pass, I am inserting a new gimple call statement, and
> then replacing the next call. This usually works fine, and after I do
> this, the gimple dump looks
Usually this works, but in one of my cases it
is failing. I have not been able to pinpoint what is unique about the
failing case. I am just looking for any insight.
Thanks!
-Matt
Hello all,
I'm testing out feedback optimization on a sample piece of code. I noticed
that the .gcno file that is output lists 10 blocks, yet the .gcda file that is
produced when I execute only contains 7 counts. I thought these were supposed
to correspond, but perhaps not? Can anyone explai
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> I am using cgraph_function_versioning() to create a duplicate
> function, e.g. a clone. This usually has worked well for me in the
> past, but I have run into an interesting case where the
> tree_function_versi
irely sure. I am not even
sure why BB5 is even created as 0 is the Entry and 1 is the exit
block. I am running gcc 4.7.1 and am a bit lost as to what to do.
-Matt
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> I need to create a global string constant node. In the past, I have
> always been able to add global variables, but I have always left them
> uninitialized. I know the trick is to build_decl() of VAR_DECL and, I
> gue
I pass to build_decl(). Is
there an example in the code my grep-foo has failed me for this
specific case?
Thanks much!
-Matt
So, I guess my question is, how can I force this stmt to hang around? I looked
at eliminate_unnecessary_stmts, and do not see any specific flags I can set to
the stmt to make 'em hang around, and I do not know what to do to make LHS
appear not "dead." Even if I set 'ssa' TREE_USED and 'decl' as DECL_PRESERVE_P.
Thanks for any information!
-Matt
lag set to 'true' Any help or
suggestions would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
-Matt
Hi Martin, thanks very much for the information!
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> Hello,
>> In my transformation of an input program, I need to clone functions
>> and the cal
clones. I know
there must be some update routine, (rebuild_cgraph_edges() did not
help) to glue the callee clones in place so that they do not revert
back to the original callee.
I hope I haven't been too confusing, I do appreciate any help if possible.
-Matt
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:21 PM, James Courtier-Dutton
wrote:
>
> On Jan 22, 2012 5:21 AM, "Matt Davis" wrote:
>> Essentially, I just want to emit: "and %eax, $0x7"
>>
> Assuming at&t format, does that instruction actually exist?
> How can you
ns, but seems I am still
having a bit of trouble.
-Matt
For a Go program being compiled in gcc, from the middle end, is there a way to
figure-out which routines make up the interface-method-table? I could check the
mangled name of the method table, but is there another way to deduce what
methods compose it from the middle-end?
Thanks!
-Matt
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2011, Matt Davis wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I am having an RTL problem trying to make a function call from a
>> COND_EXEC rtx. The reload pass has been called, and very simply I
>> want to
de for the COND_EXEC expression, which is what I
emit into the program:
rtx sym = gen_rtx_SYMBOL_REF(Pmode, "abort");
rtx abrt_addr = gen_rtx_MEM(Pmode, sym);
rtx abrt = gen_rtx_CALL(VOIDmode, abrt_addr, const0_rtx);
rtx cond = gen_rtx_COND_EXEC(VOIDmode, cmp, abrt);
Thanks
-Matt
Here is a follow up. I am closer to what I need, but not quite there
yet. Basically I just want to switch the type of one formal parameter
to a different type.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hi Martin and thank you very much for your reply. I do have some m
Hi Martin and thank you very much for your reply. I do have some more
resolution to my issue.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 01:57:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I am using 'ipa_modify_formal_parameters()'
. I also set_default_ssa_name() on the returned
value from ipa_modify_formal_parameter (the adjustment's 'reduction' field). Do
I need to re-gimplify the function or run some kind of 'cleanup' or 'update'
once I modify this formal parameter?
Thanks
-Matt
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Matt Davis writes:
>
>> I am trying to look at the arguments that are passed to a function
>> pointer. I have an SSA_NAME which is for a pointer-type to a
>> function-type. I want to obtain the argum
seem to find the arguments stashed
anywhere. I know this is somewhat of a special case. Typically, if I
had a fndecl it would be easy, but all I know in my case is the
function type.
-Matt
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Matt Davis wrote:
> I am working on a gcc-plugin where I need to create a structure at compile
> time.
> I have gleaned over one of the front ends to learn more about creating
> structures at compile time. What I have thus far is a type node for
nce to pass to
'fn()', which is 'V' in the case above? Or, will the build_constructor()
produce a tree node that I can treat as a variable, that I can pass to 'fn()' ?
-Matt
ister data as a
root in the garbage collector, so that its not in conflict with my allocation?
The other option would be to try to override "__go_new" with my own
implementation, but keeping the same symbol name so that the linker does the
dirty work.
-Matt
get built?
-Matt
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:25:45AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 09:27:49AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 4:47 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> >> > Hello,
&
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 09:27:49AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 4:47 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am having the compiler insert a call to a function which is defined inside
> > another object file. However, during inline expansion via
&
checking_assert (cg_edge);
cg_node comes back as being NULL since there is only one callee and no indirect
calls, the function that has the inserted call is main(). Is there something I
forgot to do after inserting the gimple call statement? This works fine without
optimization.
-Matt
for this PARM_DECL node? The SSA has been generated before my
plugin
executes. Also, I do call update_ssa() after the routines are processed by my
passes.
Thanks for any insight.
-Matt
my
transformation pass, still no luck
Any suggestions would be welcomed. Thanks for even reading this far.
-Matt
> As of a couple of months, I perform a bootstrap-with-C++
> (--enable-build-with-cxx) daily on my machine between 18:10 and 20:10 UTC.
> Is there still interest in daily builds like mine ?
Absolutely! Especially if you do a profiled-bootstrap and/or LTO bootstrap in
that mode. Hopefully this is
> GCC 4.6.1 first release candidate has been uploaded, and the branch
> is now frozen. All changes need RM approval now.
> Please test it, if all goes well, 4.6.1 will be released early next
> week.
No chance for a fix for this in 4.6.1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48600
This has
l/gcc/2010-01/msg00063.html
suggesting the addition of a --multilib= configure option. Has such a
thing been added? Is there a way to configure gcc to build only n32
and n64 ABIs?
Thanks,
Matt
d
for them. Can a (define_bypass ...) function specify a latency value
greater than the default latency, or should I raise the default
latency and special-case fst/ftoi consumers like I've done for
cross-cluster delay?
Thanks a lot!
Matt Turner
[1] http://www.compaq.com/cpq-a
never execute more than once, as n
must be < 2, and in the body of the loop, n is decremented.
The resulting machine code includes the backward branch to the top of
the while (n >= 1) loop, which can never be taken.
I suppose this is a missed optimization. Is this known, or should I
make a new bug report?
Thanks,
Matt Turner
l. I assume there is
a better/different way of determining if an argument points to my node?
Thanks for any insight.
-Matt
this is an actual bug, or required for some reason by the
standard, or just behavior that not enough people have run into
problems with?
Thanks,
Matt
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
>> I am writing a gcc plugin and am trying to detect if a value assigned by a
>> function call, is a global variable or not. Unfortunately, all calls to
>> '
plugin code executes for function 'fn':
:
# .MEM_4 = VDEF <.MEM_3(D)>
main.myglobal.13_1 = __go_new_nopointers (4);
# .MEM_5 = VDEF <.MEM_4>
main.myglobal = main.myglobal.13_1;
# VUSE <.MEM_5>
D.186_2 = main.myglobal;
return D.186_2;
Any insight would be helpful.
Thanks!
-Matt
, link time
optimization, C++Ox, ...
Thanks,
Matt
> > This brings out 2 questions. Why don't GCC 4.4/4.6/4.7 warn it?
> > Why doesn't 64bit GCC 4.2 warn it?
> Good question. It seems that the difference is whether the compiler
> generates a field-by-field copy or a call to memcpy(). According to
> David, the trunk gcc in 32-bit mode doesn't call
Hey Sarah,
Many array bounds and format string problems can already be found, especially
with LTO, ClooG, loop-unrolling, and -O3 enabled. Seeing across object-file
boundaries, understanding loop boundaries, and aggressive inlining allows GCC
to warn about a lot of real-world vulnerabilities. W
-it needs to have lots of variables active at once,
and the error doesn't occur unless I'm compiling for Thumb.
Unfortunately I don't have a way to test this on tips, so I can't tell
if it's been fixed there or not. Any information on this would be
appreciated.
Thanks,
Matt
On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:50 PM, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/14/2011 06:33 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:22 PM, David Daney wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/14/2011 04:15 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have to wonder if it'
On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:26 PM, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/14/2011 06:14 PM, Joe Buck wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:57:13PM -0800, Paul Koning wrote:
>>> It seems that this proposal would benefit programs that need more than 2 GB
>>> but less than 4 GB, and for some reason really don't want
On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:22 PM, David Daney wrote:
> On 02/14/2011 04:15 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>>
>> I have to wonder if it's worth the effort. The primary problem I see
>> is that this new ABI requires a 64bit kernel since faults through the
>> upper 2G will go
On Feb 14, 2011, at 12:29 PM, David Daney wrote:
> Background:
>
> Current MIPS 32-bit ABIs (both o32 and n32) are restricted to 2GB of
> user virtual memory space. This is due the way MIPS32 memory space is
> segmented. Only the range from 0..2^31-1 is available. Pointer
> values are always
On Feb 12, 2011, at 7:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 3:04 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 02/12/2011 01:10 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> Why is the ia32 compatiblity kernel interface used?
>>
>> Because there is no way in hell we're designing in a second
>> compatibility
On Feb 12, 2011, at 1:29 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * H. J. Lu:
>>
>>> We made lots of progresses on x32 pABI:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>>>
>>> 1. Kernel interface with syscall is close to be finalized.
>>> 2. GCC x32 br
ster parameter, a
PSYM and RSYM.
Please could you tell me if this assumption is correct and if so, any ideas why
gcc would not be putting this information in the elf file? Is there any
architectural dependant code that needs to be implemented that might be missing
from the port to add this debugging information?
Thanks very much,
Matt
> Your first example points to a weakness in the compiler optimization.
> If base_string constructor is inlined, the compiler should be able to
> figure out both 'name' and the heap memory it points to can not be
> modified by the call to notify, and therefore hoist access name.c_str
> () and name.
1 - 100 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
