Hello,
To:
> Can GCC 4.X be used to generate code running properly on a MPC5554
> processor ?
[...]
> What are the GCC 3.4 capabilities on the same account ?
David Edelsohn replied:
<< The base PowerPC Book-E UISA generated by GCC should work on the
MPC5554. I am not sure about the differen
Hi, gcc
I have to send the new mail again for the software floating point problem.
I need more details about it. 1) If I use software floating point, does I need
implement float mode insns in md file? Such as movsf, movdf. 2)How to
generate correct object files of libgcc2 of floating point operat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/gcc-4.0.1-test/gcc-4.0.1-test/gcc/xgcc
-
-B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/gcc-4.0.1-test/gcc-4.0.1-test/gcc/
- -B/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/install/mips-sgi-irix6.5/bin/
- -B/SCRATC
Richard Henderson wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 04:58:50PM +0100, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
The lack of a debugger that works reliably with recent gcc versions has
led to an increasing backlog of uninvestigated execution failures.
Do you think it's the debugger or the compiler that's at
Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > FWIW, I think part of the problem is that TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS is not
> > set on the constructor, despite the presence of a function call in
> > the components.
> No, that is not the problem. The problem is that we gimplify the
> expression for side effects but don't actua
Kaz Kojima wrote:
some compile time errors in c/c++ test for sh64-unknown-linux-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00466.html
3 tests
gcc.c-torture/compile/simd-4.c
gcc.c-torture/execute/20050604-1.c
gcc.dg/torture/pr21817-1.c
fail with the similar ICE:
gcc/gcc/testsuite
Thanks for the review.
Richard Henderson wrote:
Though I'll state again for the record that any ABI that bases
its decisions on modes instead of tree codes is broken.
The specific mode that was tested against was BLKmode. If we want to
make ports
impervious to random use of BLKmode, we sh
/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00598.html). I have now
upgraded my port to the current mainline (4.1.0 20050912), and all of
my regression tests which exposed the original bug now pass, with no
need for the patch. From inspecting the code, I believe that another
bug fix I recently applied to my port
(http:/
> Daniel Towner writes:
Daniel> Assuming that my port doesn't require a patch in sched-deps.c, can I
Daniel> submit this port to gcc in time for the 4.1 branch, or must I wait
Daniel> until afterwards? If I was allowed to submit before the branch, what
Daniel> would the deadline be?
G
Is there any plan to support Windows/x86-64? What are needed for the
port?
H.J.
Daniel Towner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The linker and assembler used by the port are proprietary, and can't
> be made publicly available at this point. The port will have to be
> assembler output only.
I suppose this means that nobody but you will ever be able to run/test your
backend. If you
On Monday 12 September 2005 18:55, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Daniel Towner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The linker and assembler used by the port are proprietary, and can't
> > be made publicly available at this point. The port will have to be
> > assembler output only.
>
> I suppose this means that
Original Message
>From: Steven Bosscher
>Sent: 12 September 2005 18:01
> On Monday 12 September 2005 18:55, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>> Daniel Towner wrote:
>>> The linker and assembler used by the port are proprietary, and can't
>>> be made publicly available at this point. The port will hav
Daniel Towner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The linker and assembler used by the port are proprietary, and can't
> > be made publicly available at this point. The port will have to be
> > assembler output only.
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 06:55:28PM +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> I suppose this means
Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> The linker and assembler used by the port are proprietary, and can't
>>> be made publicly available at this point. The port will have to be
>>> assembler output only.
>>
>> I suppose this means that nobody but you will ever be able to run/test
your
>>
A similar issue was raised last Spring and discussed by the GCC
Steering Committee. Mark Mitchell summarized the response, including
Richard Stallman's comment:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-06/msg00134.html
There is no need to resurrect that debate.
David
Original Message
>From: David Edelsohn
>Sent: 12 September 2005 19:00
> A similar issue was raised last Spring and discussed by the GCC
> Steering Committee. Mark Mitchell summarized the response, including
> Richard Stallman's comment:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-06/msg0013
Vladimir N. Makarov wrote:
> The ORC backend optimizations proven to work for Itanium could be
> rewritten for RTL with usage of existing gcc infrastructure, added to
> gcc and could be used for other ports. I think it is more right way to do.
I strongly agree, except that I would generalize "RT
Andrew Haley wrote:
> There's a thread at
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/gnu.gcc.help/tree/browse_frm/thread/e85dce7d69fb7dc1
> which looks odd. It seems that the exception filter is not being
> correctly processed.
>
> I can't find a Bugzilla entry for this. Is it really a bug?
>
> Andrew.
On Sep 12, 2005, at 8:32 AM, Daniel Towner wrote:
I would now like to formally contribute this port.
The way to do that is to send an email to gcc-patches, with the
port. :-) You can also volunteer to maintain the port at the same
time, if you so choose.
On 12 Sep 2005, Steven Bosscher gibbered uncontrollably:
> I think people should object. What is the point in having a free
> software compiler if e.g. users can't use a complete free toolchain;
> or gcc developers not being able to test changes when some patch
> needs changes in every port.
Well
Hi all,
I intend to use gcc's C++ parser and the intermediate representation
it creates for use in source browsing, etc. I have a few questions
regarding this: firstly, is it possible to plug out the parser and
intermediate representation code (presumably only in the front-end?)
relatively easily?
On 09/12/05 15:30, Ashwin Bharambe wrote:
is it possible to plug out the parser and intermediate representation code
(presumably only in the front-end?) relatively easily?
Not really. Though we have been re-designing the internal architecture
to be more modular, all the components are meant
Hmm. Ok fine, I can live with having to keep all extraneous code lying
around. But it seems like there must be a way to:
- stop gcc once the cp frontend parses the code and generates the
parse tree structure.
- disable the stage1,stage2 compilation etc. during the build process?
Or, is there s
You can start off by looking into how -fsyntax-only option is
implemented.
- fariborz
On Sep 12, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Ashwin Bharambe wrote:
Hmm. Ok fine, I can live with having to keep all extraneous code lying
around. But it seems like there must be a way to:
- stop gcc once the cp front
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Ashwin Bharambe wrote:
- disable the stage1,stage2 compilation etc. during the build process?
IIRC cross-compilers do not use stage1/2/3 as it is not possible to
execute produced target binary on the host platform. And for compiling
cross-compiler simple `make' is used.
On 09/12/05 15:55, Ashwin Bharambe wrote:
- stop gcc once the cp frontend parses the code and generates the
parse tree structure.
Check -fsyntax-only.
- disable the stage1,stage2 compilation etc. during the build process?
just do 'make all' instead of 'make bootstrap'.
Eric Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have to send the new mail again for the software floating point problem.
> I need more details about it. 1) If I use software floating point, does I
> need
> implement float mode insns in md file? Such as movsf, movdf.
You do have to implement movsf a
"Giovanni Bajo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It was an ill-defined and poorly maintained language extension that
> > was broken in many cases.
> That's an overstatement. I've been using it for years without any
> problem, and was very deprived by
Greetings.
I attempted to search through Bugzilla, but I did not find anything that
matched my query. When using the options '-O0' and '-g' together with GCC-4.1.0,
I get an executable that will segfault. If I use all the other optimizations of
-O1, -O2 or -Os I do not have this problem. I am usi
On Sep 12, 2005, at 7:17 PM, Steven J. Hill wrote:
Greetings.
I attempted to search through Bugzilla, but I did not find anything
that
matched my query. When using the options '-O0' and '-g' together
with GCC-4.1.0,
I get an executable that will segfault. If I use all the other
optimizat
Eric Christopher wrote:
I've not seen it, but do you see it with, say, those options and the
simulator testsuite? (I don't have one built at the moment or I'd check
myself.)
I assume you mean using the gdb simulator, or what? Sorry for my ignorance.
Otherwise, what's the code look like
I assume you mean using the gdb simulator, or what? Sorry for my
ignorance.
Yup.
Otherwise, what's the code look like where they segfault?
Let me quantify that and I will post a tarball tomorrow. Thanks.
OK. I don't have any mips hardware at the moment, but I should be
able to he
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 09:17:57PM -0500, Steven J. Hill wrote:
> I attempted to search through Bugzilla, but I did not find anything that
> matched my query. When using the options '-O0' and '-g' together with
> GCC-4.1.0,
> I get an executable that will segfault. If I use all the other
> optimi
Can someone please help me getting the following information?
1) I would like to obtain the loop bounds (constant case) of all nested
loops
of a RTL insn. Is there a data structure over which I can iterate to get
bounds
for each nested loop of a RTL insn?
2) Is there a way of determining sequen
35 matches
Mail list logo
