Hi,
when porting gcc (still 3.4.4), how do I exactly know whether I
need to pass --enable-sjlj-exceptions to configure?
Is there a test case which fails if I need it and have it not
enabled, and passes otherwise (disabled and not needed, or
enabled)?
TIA,
//mirabile
--
> Hi, does anyone sell op
Hello James,
Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 6:36:56 AM, you wrote:
JEW> Sergei Tovpeko wrote:
>> Is there any util that would produce result containing the asm code
>> execution staticstics ???
JEW> I assume you want assembly instruction execution counts. You could
JEW> produce this info from gcov wi
Jon,
How is the latency of instructions that have side effects modeled in the DFA
scheduler. For example, define_insn_reservation only has one latency value,
yet instructions such as loads with post increment addressing have two
outputs, possibly with different latencies. Do both outputs get the sa
Jon,
(define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
(define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
(define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type" "store") "x,m*2")
Stores don't really have a 'result', why have you set the cycle
count to 3? Shouldn't it be
Andrew,
You were right:
I think this is caused by:
2005-04-25 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* tree-ssa-alias.c (fieldoff_t): Remove.
(fieldoff_s): typedef the structure itself. Create a vector of
objects.
(push_fields_onto_fieldstack): Return count of fields
Paul Thomas wrote:
Andrew,
You were right:
I think this is caused by:
2005-04-25 Nathan Sidwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* tree-ssa-alias.c (fieldoff_t): Remove.
(fieldoff_s): typedef the structure itself. Create a vector of
objects.
(push_fields_onto_fieldstack): Retu
Hello Everyone,
I want to know what is to be expected out of a 'Free-Standard'
implementation of gcc, glibc and newlib that confirms to C89 standard.
We have gcc ported to a new custom processor and the porting company
says it is a free-standing version. So, what all can I expect out of it
a
> Jon,
> > (define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
> > (define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
> > (define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type"
> "store") "x,m*2")
>
> Stores don't really have a 'result', why have you set the
> cycle c
Original Message
>From: Sriharsha Vedurmudi
>Sent: 26 April 2005 12:37
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I want to know what is to be expected out of a 'Free-Standard'
> implementation of gcc, glibc and newlib that confirms to C89 standard.
> We have gcc ported to a new custom processor and the p
Jon Beniston wrote:
Jon,
(define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
(define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
(define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type"
"store") "x,m*2")
Stores don't really have a 'result', why have you set the
cycle count
Hi,
i just built GCC 4.0.0 on AIX 5.1 using the following commands:
../gcc-4.0.0/configure --with-libiconv-prefix=/usr --disable-nls
--disable-multilib
make bootstrap-lean
make install
$ config.guess
powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0
Configu
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 12:52, Jon Beniston wrote:
> > Jon,
> > > (define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
> > > (define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
> > > (define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type"
> > "store") "x,m*2")
> >
> > Stores
Hello,
PPC EABI targets are currently configured with both BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT and
PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY set to 128, I believe to accomodate
"a long double member within a structure or union shall start at the lowest
available offset aligned on a 16byte boundary"
Besides, for 32bit non-alt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 05:52:33PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Bruce Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Earlier versions of gcc retain static character strings in object
> > files which can be used for identification via ident (RCS) or what
> > (S
Jon Beniston wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to get the DFA scheduler in GCC 4.0.0 to schedule loads and
stores, but I can only get it to work for loads. I have an automaton defined
as follows:
(define_automaton "cpu")
(define_cpu_unit "x" "cpu")
(define_cpu_unit "m" "cpu")
(define_insn_reservation "arith" 1
Original Message
>From: Olivier Hainque
>Sent: 26 April 2005 14:25
> "a long double member within a structure or union shall start at the
>lowest available offset aligned on a 16byte boundary"
>
> Now, I'm a bit unclear on the meaning of the ABI statement quoted above,
> and on the
> Nathan Sidwell writes:
>> (define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
>> (define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
>> (define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type" "store") "x,m*2")
Nathan> Stores don't really have a 'result', why have you
David Edelsohn wrote:
Nathan Sidwell writes:
(define_insn_reservation "arith" 1 (eq_attr "type" "arith") "x")
(define_insn_reservation "loads" 2 (eq_attr "type" "load") "x,m")
(define_insn_reservation "stores" 3 (eq_attr "type" "store") "x,m*2")
Nathan> Stores don't really have a 'result', why ha
Hi Vlad,
> There is not enough information to say what is wrong. It
> would be better if you send gcc output when
> -fsched-verbose=10 is used.
Cheers,
Jon
;; ==
;; -- basic block 0 from 18 to 32 -- before reload
;; ==
Demonstration code:
--
#define AAA 0x1U
#define BBB 0x2U
struct foo {
unsigned int bar:8;
};
struct foo foos[] = {
{ ~(AAA) },
{ ~(BBB) },
{ ~(AAA|BBB) },
{ ~(AAA&BBB) }
};
--
compiling with gcc 3.x produced no warnings, as expe
Jon Beniston wrote:
Hi Vlad,
There is not enough information to say what is wrong. It
would be better if you send gcc output when
-fsched-verbose=10 is used.
Cheers,
Jon
;; Ready list (t = 10):32 28 24
;; 10--> 24 [`y']=r43 :x,m*2
;; Ready
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Bruce Lilly wrote:
> Demonstration code:
> --
> #define AAA 0x1U
> #define BBB 0x2U
>
> struct foo {
> unsigned int bar:8;
> };
>
> struct foo foos[] = {
> { ~(AAA) },
> { ~(BBB) },
> { ~(AAA|BBB) },
> { ~(AAA&BBB) }
> };
> ---
Dave Korn wrote:
> > "a long double member within a structure or union shall start at the
> >lowest available offset aligned on a 16byte boundary"
> It only implies that the offset should be such a multiple, but since the
> struct itself will have to be aligned to a multiple of 16 if any o
Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 2005-04-15, at 23:59, Mike Stump wrote:
|
| > On Friday, April 15, 2005, at 02:52 PM, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
| >>> My god, you didn't actually buy into that did you? Hint, it was
| >>> is, and always will be a joke.
| >>
| >> You dare to explain wh
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 12:57:54PM +0400, Sergei Tovpeko wrote:
> Hello James,
>
> Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 6:36:56 AM, you wrote:
>
> JEW> Sergei Tovpeko wrote:
> >> Is there any util that would produce result containing the asm code
> >> execution staticstics ???
>
> JEW> I assume you want ass
On Mon April 25 2005 20:52, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Bruce Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Earlier versions of gcc retain static character strings in object
> > files which can be used for identification via ident (RCS) or what
> > (SCCS). Gcc 4.0.0 removes them above optimization level 1.
We use the feature of placing strings into the object file somewhat
differently.
We record configuration and compilation-related info. into strings which are
collesced into their own linkage section. A runtime component traverses
this
config. info. section to ensure that the various separately l
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 01:57, Sergei Tovpeko wrote:
> Does it mean that GCOV have much more data (in its binary format)
> but don't treat them and out to user in human format?
We have branch taken/not-taken counts, and from that, we can compute
basic block execution counts and branch probabilities.
On Apr 26, 2005, at 1:00 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
when porting gcc (still 3.4.4), how do I exactly know whether I
need to pass --enable-sjlj-exceptions to configure?
You should never need it.
Is there a test case which fails if I need it and have it not
enabled, and passes otherwise (disabled and
I just compiled gcc-4.0 with the fvisibility-inlines-hidden option,
and I get undefined symbols when linking c++ code with libstdc++.
For example this simple c++ file does not compile:
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main (void)
{
basic_string a = "thing one";
string
Panagiotis Papadakos wrote:
>I just compiled gcc-4.0 with the fvisibility-inlines-hidden option,
>and I get undefined symbols when linking c++ code with libstdc++.
>For example this simple c++ file does not compile:
>
>
Can you please compare what you are seeing with libstdc++/19664? I
believe i
On Tue April 26 2005 11:10, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Bruce Lilly wrote:
>
> > Demonstration code:
> > --
> > #define AAA 0x1U
> > #define BBB 0x2U
> >
> > struct foo {
> > unsigned int bar:8;
> > };
> >
> > struct foo foos[] = {
> > { ~(AAA) }
Bruce Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I don't see why you think the warnings are spurious. ~(AAA), for example,
>> is 4294967294,
>
> No, in this context it is 254 (an 8-bit unsigned field with the LSB clear).
C does not work the way you think. AAA has type unsigned int. The
expression ~
Øystein Johansen wrote:
But why is the /gcc4.1/include/ directory empty?
I think if you build only the C compiler, and your target doesn't
support mudflap, then you won't get any files here. This is because the
C compiler doesn't have anything to put there. Otherwise, there will be
files here.
Martin Koegler wrote:
typedef struct x ax __attribute__ ((eeprom));
void test1(ax* x)
One possible solution is to change your syntax. eeprom is supposed to
be an attribute that applies to a decl. You are using a trick here to
apply it to a type via a typedef, which takes advantage of the fact t
Sorry, I dropped the ball on this one.
On Mar 24, 2005, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I realize the sequence construct is already taken for delayed
>> branches, but that's only in the outermost insn pattern. We could
>> overload the meaning, or just en
On Mar 28, 2005, Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> More specifically, if GCC enabled set to optionally specify multiple targets
> for a single rtl source expression, i.e.:
> (set ((reg:xx %0) (reg CC) ...) (some-expression:xx ...))
There's always (set (parallel (...)) (some-expression))
Olivier Hainque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
>
> PPC EABI targets are currently configured with both BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT and
> PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY set to 128, I believe to accomodate
>
> "a long double member within a structure or union shall start at the lowest
>available offse
Matt Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Running the libstdc++ testsuite on NetBSD/sparc or NetBSD/sparc64
> results in most tests failing like:
>
> :1: fatal error: had to relocate PCH
> compilation terminated.
> compiler exited with status 1
>
> This is due to a misassumption in ggc-common.c:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Nathanael Nerode
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 8:47 PM
[...]
>
> Actually, I was going to try to convince y'all to allow the *configury*
> to be put in the *configure* files. All of it. The current sc
Andrew Haley wrote:
* postreload-gcse.c (hash_scan_set): Removve bogus assertion.
I agree with Roger here, we need to add code to handle REG_EG_REGION
notes here instead of just dropping the gcc_assert call. See my 2 week
old message on the gcc list when this first came up
http://gcc.gnu.or
Devang Patel wrote:
* dbxout.c (dbxout_type): Emit attribute vector.
You are setting have_used_extensions without first checking
use_gnu_debug_info_extensions, which is wrong. If you look at the code,
you will see that this idiom is used everywhere in dbxout.c.
Bootstrapped and tested o
Paul Woegerer wrote:
two weeks ago i've posted a new port to gcc-patches and it seems
that no global maintainer took a look at it so far. Maybe now that
the 4.0 is released there is someone who can take a look at it :)
I should be able to help with this if no one else can, as I am trying to
review
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 05:55:21PM -0700, James E Wilson wrote:
> Devang Patel wrote:
> >* dbxout.c (dbxout_type): Emit attribute vector.
>
> You are setting have_used_extensions without first checking
> use_gnu_debug_info_extensions, which is wrong. If you look at the code,
> you will
This doesn't change any functionality, it just moves and cleans up a
large number of complicated macros in vax.h to normal C code in vax.c.
It's the first major step to integrating PIC support that I did for
gcc 2.95.3. It also switches from using SYMBOL_REF_FLAG to
SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P.
Committed.
On Apr 26, 2005, at 5:55 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
* dbxout.c (dbxout_type): Emit attribute vector.
You are setting have_used_extensions without first checking
use_gnu_debug_info_extensions, which is wrong. If you look at the
code, you will see that this idiom is us
Over the past month I've been making sure that GCC 4.1 works on NetBSD.
I've completed bootstraps on sparc, sparc64, arm, x86_64, i386, alpha,
mipsel, mipseb, and powerpc. I've done cross-build targets for vax.
Results have been sent to gcc-testsuite.
The times to complete bootstraps on older mach
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 07:50:40PM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote:
> Over the past month I've been making sure that GCC 4.1 works on NetBSD.
> I've completed bootstraps on sparc, sparc64, arm, x86_64, i386, alpha,
> mipsel, mipseb, and powerpc. I've done cross-build targets for vax.
> Results have been
Jean-Paul Rigault wrote:
- I had to use the --enable-languages option to get the Ada compiler;
without it, and contrarily to what is suggested in the installation doc,
Ada was not built.
- the HTML documentation is generated in /objdir//gcc/HTML, not in
/objdir//HTML as indicated in the document
> From: Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On Mar 28, 2005, Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> More specifically, if GCC enabled set to optionally specify multiple targets
>> for a single rtl source expression, i.e.:
>
>> (set ((reg:xx %0) (reg CC) ...) (some-expression:xx ...))
>
> From: Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On Mar 28, 2005, Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> More specifically, if GCC enabled set to optionally specify multiple targets
>> for a single rtl source expression, i.e.:
>
>> (set ((reg:xx %0) (reg CC) ...) (some-expression:xx ...))
>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:57:07PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> I would expect it to be drastically faster. However this won't show up
> clearly in the bootstrap. The, bar none, longest bit of the bootstrap
> is building stage2; and stage1 is always built with optimization off and
> (IIRC) c
Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:57:07PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
>>I would expect it to be drastically faster. However this won't show up
>>clearly in the bootstrap. The, bar none, longest bit of the bootstrap
>>is building stage2; and stage1 is always built with o
Back when I modified gcc 2.95.3 to produce PIC code for NetBSD/vax, I changed
the patterns in vax.md to be more specific with the instructions that got
matched. The one advantage (to me as the writer) was it made it much easier
to track down what pattern caused what instruction to be emitted.
For
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:42 PM
[...]
>
> Alas, the --disable-checking and STAGE1_CFLAGS="-O2 -g" (which I was
> already doing) only decreased the bootstrap time by 10%. By far, the
> longest bit of the bootstrap is building libjava.
>
Matt Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a 50MHz 68060 with 96MB of memory (MVME177) approaching 100 hours
> (48 hours just to exit stage3 and start on the libraries) doing a bootstrap
> knowing that it's going to die when doing the ranlib of libjava. The kernel
> for the 060 isn't config
Gary Funck wrote:
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Matt Thomas
>>Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:42 PM
>
> [...]
>
>>Alas, the --disable-checking and STAGE1_CFLAGS="-O2 -g" (which I was
>>already doing) only decreased the bootstrap time by 10%. By far, the
>>longest bit of the bootstrap
Matt Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> libjava is built on everything but vax and mips. Bootstrapping core
> might be better but do the configure on the fly it's not as easy as
> it used to be.
--enable-languages=c,c++ (or even perhaps --enable-languages=c)
doesn't work for you?
Also, I beli
Just some notes I've gathered on folding statements modified by TER...
First, a lot of the changes made do not affect the code we generate in
a meaningful way. That's because a lot of the changes merely reorder
operands in conditionals, arithmetic expressions and the like. For
example, after TE
Wasn't TER a temporary kludge that should be going away?
zw
>
> I like the more and simplier patterns approach but I'm wondering what
> the general recommendation is?
Mostly what I go for in individual insns,though I try to make sure that
the lengths are equal and it's something generated by the named
patterns. I.e. make sure that the patterns you do hav
Matt Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:57:07PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >
> >>I would expect it to be drastically faster. However this won't show up
> >>clearly in the bootstrap. The, bar none, longest bit of the boot
62 matches
Mail list logo
