Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

Is there any option to ask GCC to print various size and alignment info on the target platform? This would be very nice during cross compilation when one can not run the executables to autoconfigure for such parameters. Currently I consider for that a hack like copiling the following source: #in

cp/do_poplevel

The following: 2006-01-23 Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * cp-tree.h (do_poplevel): Remove prototype. * semantics.c (do_poplevel): Add prototype. Make static. Is a plain mistake due to: ../.././gcc/objcp/objcp-decl.c: In function 'tree_node* objcp_end_compound_stmt(t

Re: cp/default_conversion

The following removal of global default_conversion inside the C++ frontend: 2006-01-25 Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (default_conversion): Likewise. Is junk due to the fact that it gets used for example in rs6000/rs6000.c The results in *actual* build failure on Darwin/PowerPC

Re: Patch: Boehm GC 6.6 merge

Ranjit Mathew writes: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bryce McKinlay wrote: > > This patch merges the GC 6.6 sources into the libgcj trunk. Two patches > [...] > > This little bit in "boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h" (line 306): > - - 8<

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

I tried 'make all-stage1 STAGE1_LANGUAGES=c++,fortran'. Not only that didn't work, it wiped the directory /gcc/testsuite. I believe it was only relocated in stage3-gcc/testsuite. Right now to change the STAGE1_LANGUAGES, you have to remove the stage1-gcc directory. I have a patch to fix this

/gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

I've asked about this recently, but I still cannot do what I used to do before the toplevel bootstrap changes. The scenario is this: I just finished bootstrapping the compiler and found that there are new C++ and Fortran failures in the testsuite. So, I go into and want to rebuild f951 and cc1p

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > I believe it was only relocated in stage3-gcc/testsuite. Huh. Any reason in particular? Why not leave it in /gcc? > Right now to change the STAGE1_LANGUAGES, you have to remove the > stage1-gcc directory. I have a patch to fix this; I'm not sure that > the slush is the bes

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

Diego Novillo wrote: Paolo Bonzini wrote: I believe it was only relocated in stage3-gcc/testsuite. Huh. Any reason in particular? Why not leave it in /gcc? Because all the gcc directory has been relocated in stage3-gcc. It allows you for example to run the testsuite for stage2 a

Porting problem from GCC-4.0 to GCC 4.1

Hi all I have ported GCC-4.0 for a new target. Initially I started porting with GCC-3.4 and then shifted to GCC-4.0 without any problems. Now I want to port same code for GCC-4.1 . As there are some structural differences in GCC-4.0 and gcc-4.1 back-ends specially regarding addition of .opt file

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Because all the gcc directory has been relocated in stage3-gcc. It > allows you for example to run the testsuite for stage2 and then to > compare stage2 and stage3 results, for example. > Ah, OK. > No, it will allow you to do "make cc1plus" or "make f951" within the > build

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

So, I would just need to move /gcc/testsuite into /stage1-gcc? I suppose. I don't understand why can't you just look in stage3-gcc/testsuite, but I guess you know what you're doing. :-) Also note that with my patch you could do make check-fortran: all the targets for the disabled languag

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > I suppose. I don't understand why can't you just look in > stage3-gcc/testsuite, but I guess you know what you're doing. :-) > Hmm, now that I think about it again. The log contains command lines that use the compiler built in /gcc. Something like /gcc/testsuite/gfortran/.

Re: /gcc/testsuite disappears when recompiling

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:06:06AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > I suppose. I don't understand why can't you just look in > > stage3-gcc/testsuite, but I guess you know what you're doing. :-) > > > Hmm, now that I think about it again. The log contains command lines > tha

Re: cp/do_poplevel

On 25 Jan, Marcin Dalecki wrote: > The following: > > 2006-01-23 Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * cp-tree.h (do_poplevel): Remove prototype. > * semantics.c (do_poplevel): Add prototype. Make static. > > > Is a plain mistake due to: > > ../.././gcc/objcp/objcp-decl.c: I

Re: cp/default_conversion

On 25 Jan, Marcin Dalecki wrote: > The following removal of global default_conversion inside the C++ > frontend: > > 2006-01-25 Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > (default_conversion): Likewise. > > Is junk due to the fact that it gets used for example in rs6000/rs6000.c > The res

Re: cp/default_conversion

> > On 25 Jan, Marcin Dalecki wrote: > > The following removal of global default_conversion inside the C++ > > frontend: > > > > 2006-01-25 Volker Reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > (default_conversion): Likewise. > > > > Is junk due to the fact that it gets used for example in rs6000

Re: Bootstrap failure on sparc*-sun-solaris2.10

On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 11:55:32PM -0500, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote: > Okay, now I get: [...] >"build/gencondmd.c", line 60: incomplete struct/union/enum c_test: > insn_conditions >"build/gencondmd.c", line 1952: warning: syntax error: empty initializer >"build/gencondmd.c", line 1952: can

Re: Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

On Wednesday 25 January 2006 10:20, Igor Bukanov wrote: > Is there any option to ask GCC to print various size and alignment > info on the target platform? This would be very nice during cross > compilation when one can not run the executables to autoconfigure for > such parameters. > > Currently

Re: bootstrap failure for Ada gcc 4.1 Revision 110108 on

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 John David Anglin schrieb: >> Perhaps I have to be more precise. Bootstrapping ada failed! > > That's not enough! In order for someone else to duplicate the failure > and investigate the problem, you need to provide the log of what happened, > your

Re: Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

On 1/25/06, Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Autoconf already has tests for things like this. Something along the lines of: > > const char D_P_S_4[sizeof(void *) == 4 : -1 : 1]; > const char D_P_S_8[sizeof(void *) == 8 : -1 : 1]; > > Then see which compiles, or grep the error messages. Righ

Re: bootstrap failure for Ada gcc 4.1 Revision 110108 on

> Ok, I did a bootstrap and testsuite run without passing -mpa-risc-2-0 to > the boostrap compiler. Testresults including configure options and > environment at > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg01297.html > > the only acats test that failed: c52103x Expected failure on all plat

Re: RTL alias analysis

On Jan 22, 2006, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/22/06, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't think it is any different. GCC's exception for unions only >> applies if the object is accessed using the union type. So they are >> indeed equivalent. The scary thin

Re: Bootstrap failure on sparc*-sun-solaris2.10

> The appended patch (superseding the earlier one, Kaveh) should fix > both these issues. I have to run off to school and won't be able to > do anything more till this evening, but please let me know how it > goes. > zw Zack - using your latest genconditions.c patch plus this one: http://gcc

Re: Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

Igor Bukanov wrote: On 1/25/06, Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Autoconf already has tests for things like this. Something along the lines of: const char D_P_S_4[sizeof(void *) == 4 : -1 : 1]; const char D_P_S_8[sizeof(void *) == 8 : -1 : 1]; Then see which compiles, or grep the error m

Program konferencji dla gcc@gcc.gnu.org

Program konferencji: http://210.1.7.185/lvov.html 11-12 lutego 2006 r. Ukraina, Lwow, Hotel "Sputnik"

Program konferencji dla [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Program konferencji: http://210.1.7.185/lvov.html 11-12 lutego 2006 r. Ukraina, Lwow, Hotel "Sputnik"

Re: Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

On 1/25/06, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A convenient way to get the endianness is to use > the System.Bit_Order attribute in Ada. But this requires to run the program on the target which is not possible with a cross-compiler. Or is there a trick to declare something in Ada that would

Re: bootstrap failure for Ada gcc 4.1 Revision 110108 on

> Ok, I did a bootstrap and testsuite run without passing -mpa-risc-2-0 to the > boostrap compiler. Testresults including configure options and environment at > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg01297.html > > the only acats test that failed: c52103x Your results are better than

Re: Option to print word size, alignment on the target platform

Igor Bukanov wrote: On 1/25/06, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A convenient way to get the endianness is to use the System.Bit_Order attribute in Ada. But this requires to run the program on the target which is not possible with a cross-compiler. Or is there a trick to declare somet

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 08:07:34AM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote: > * genautomata.c (main): Add insn-config.h and recog.h to the > include list. > * Makefile.in (insn-automata.o): Adjust dependencies for the above > includes. Ok. r~

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> 2006-01-25 Andreas Tobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * genautomata.c (main): Add insn-config.h and recog.h to the > include list. > * Makefile.in (insn-automata.o): Adjust dependencies for the above > includes. Andreas, I don't know if you have checked this in ye

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 10:17:40AM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > 2006-01-25 Andreas Tobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > * genautomata.c (main): Add insn-config.h and recog.h to the > > include list. > > * Makefile.in (insn-automata.o): Adjust dependencies for the above >

Re: Patch: Boehm GC 6.6 merge

Andrew Haley wrote: Ranjit Mathew writes: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Bryce McKinlay wrote: > > This patch merges the GC 6.6 sources into the libgcj trunk. Two patches > [...] > > This little bit in "boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h" (line 306): > - -

Re: Problem with gfortran or did I messsed up GMP installation?

Quoting Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Please make sure every bit of the hacked GMP has been wiped out on Solaris 9. Should I file bug on bugzilla? Sure, if you can reproduce it after cleaning up the Solaris 9 machine. To confirm things, I did following: Install gcc 2.8.1 binary (from

Re: Problem with gfortran or did I messsed up GMP installation?

> Compile GMP 4.1.4: > > $ ../configure ABI=32 --prefix=/gcc-test --enable-mpfr Would you mind trying as documented in http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#sparc-sun-solaris2 i.e. with --build=sparc-sun-solaris2.9 instead of ABI=32? Thanks in advance. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: x86-64 linux, gomp ICE in trunk

tbp wrote: > src/raytrace_packet.cpp:1411: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault > Please submit a full bug report > You'll need to do what this message suggests. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/

Re: Problem with gfortran or did I messsed up GMP installation?

Quoting Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Compile GMP 4.1.4: $ ../configure ABI=32 --prefix=/gcc-test --enable-mpfr Would you mind trying as documented in http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#sparc-sun-solaris2 i.e. with --build=sparc-sun-solaris2.9 instead of ABI=32? I'll try it.

Future possible stack based optimization

Hi, I saw that stack instructions on Intel platform are not used that much. I think this is a pity cause stack operations are small (size optimization) and usually fast (from Pentium two consecutive push/pop are executed together -> speed optimization). Consider this small piece of code extern i

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

Steve Ellcey wrote: 2006-01-25 Andreas Tobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * genautomata.c (main): Add insn-config.h and recog.h to the include list. * Makefile.in (insn-automata.o): Adjust dependencies for the above includes. Andreas, I don't know if you have checked

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> > I still get implicitly declared errors for a couple of functions declared > > in ia64-protos.h. I think the patch needs to be expanded to include > > tm_p.h in addition to tm.h. I am testing that now. > > Shall I help? I have a fast sunfire here where I can cross check. > > I wait until you

Re: Future possible stack based optimization

> I saw that stack instructions on Intel platform are not used that > much. I think this is a pity cause stack operations are small (size > optimization) and usually fast (from Pentium two consecutive push/pop > are executed together -> speed optimization). Consider this small > piece of code

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:01:17PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > I took Zack's advice and put all the includes from insn-attrtab.c into > insn-automata.c. My current problem is that I get: > > | insn-automata.c: In function 'print_reservation': > | insn-automata.c:22466: warning: string length

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

Zack Weinberg wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:01:17PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: I took Zack's advice and put all the includes from insn-attrtab.c into insn-automata.c. My current problem is that I get: | insn-automata.c: In function 'print_reservation': | insn-automata.c:22466: warning: str

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:01:17PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > > > I took Zack's advice and put all the includes from insn-attrtab.c into > > insn-automata.c. My current problem is that I get: > > > > | insn-automata.c: In function 'print_reservation': > > | insn-automata.c:22466: warning:

Re: Results for 4.1.0 20060117 (prerelease) testsuite on powerpc-apple-darwin8.4.0 (-m64 results)

On Jan 23, 2006, at 8:07 PM, Shantonu Sen wrote: I've posted a new version of odcctools (based on Apple's cctools and ld64 source) which should fix a few thousand of the failures. Instructions are at: This is based on ccto

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

Steve Ellcey wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:01:17PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: I took Zack's advice and put all the includes from insn-attrtab.c into insn-automata.c. My current problem is that I get: | insn-automata.c: In function 'print_reservation': | insn-automata.c:22466: warning: stri

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 02:10:33PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > It seems to be coming from the reservation_names array set up in > print_reservation. One of the entries is: > > "(1_0m_bs,1_m_cont)|(1_0mi_bs,1_mi_cont|nothing)|(1_0mm_bs,1_mm_cont)|(1_0mf_bs,1_mf_cont|nothing)|(1_0b_bs,1_b_cont|

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> Hm, then I suggest at first to propose your patch to resolve the implict > declarations. ( I have the applied the same on sparc-solaris. ) > > Andreas Andreas, I think that is a good idea. It gets us a bit further. Since my patch is just an extension of yours why don't you go ahead and subm

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

Steve Ellcey wrote: Hm, then I suggest at first to propose your patch to resolve the implict declarations. ( I have the applied the same on sparc-solaris. ) I think that is a good idea. It gets us a bit further. Since my patch is just an extension of yours why don't you go ahead and submit i

Re: Results for 4.1.0 20060117 (prerelease) testsuite on powerpc-apple-darwin8.4.0 (-m64 results)

I'm not recommending anything, I'm trying to help you verify whether GCC's testsuite is failing because of testsuite bugs, gcc bugs, tools bugs, or OS bugs. This should help you focus on the legitimate problems with gcc. In this case, the thousands of failures were an interaction between

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> Well, my testing is done so far, including test suite runs for -m32/64 > solaris. But the important thing is, that _your_ implict declarations > are fixed. Mine are. Yes, my implicit declarations are fixed. > Another thing, the day is going to an end here and I'll be not able to > fix any is

Attribute data structure rewrite?

Hi Geoff, re this mail: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg01357.html do you still have the code around? Are you still willing to contribute it? Maybe you could upload it to a branch just to have it around in case someone is willing to update/finish it. Thanks! Giovanni Bajo

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

> > It seems to be coming from the reservation_names array set up in > > print_reservation. One of the entries is: > > > > "(1_0m_bs,1_m_cont)|(1_0mi_bs,1_mi_cont|nothing)|(1_0mm_bs,1_mm_cont)|(1_0mf_bs,1_mf_cont|nothing)|(1_0b_bs,1_b_cont|nothing)|(1_0bb_bs,1_bb_cont|nothing)|(1_0mb_bs,1_mb_cont

Re: bootstrap broken on solaris8

On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 04:13:02PM -0800, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > I see, in an older GCC build output I see a compilation of > insn-attrtab.c and I get the messages: > > /proj/opensrc/sje/svn/gcc.patch/trunk/gcc/config/ia64/itanium2.md: In > function 'print_reservation': > /proj/opensrc/sje/svn/

Re: Attribute data structure rewrite?

On 25/01/2006, at 4:09 PM, Giovanni Bajo wrote: Hi Geoff, re this mail: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg01357.html do you still have the code around? Are you still willing to contribute it? Maybe you could upload it to a branch just to have it around in case someone is willing to up

issue with references to weak symbols in PIEs

before people dismiss this as a Gentoo-specific issue, the code fails with Redhat and Debian toolchains as well. tested gcc 3.4.5, 4.0.3, and a snap of 4.1.x dated 20060120. we were playing with arrays of pointers to weak functions in a utility program when we noticed the code started crashing

Re: issue with references to weak symbols in PIEs

On Jan 25, 2006, at 8:49 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: we were playing with arrays of pointers to weak functions in a utility program when we noticed the code started crashing whenever built with a Gentoo hardened toolchain. Gentoo vanilla toolchains would produce code that ran nicely and as expe

Re: Bootstrap failure on sparc*-sun-solaris2.10

> Zack - using your latest genconditions.c patch plus this one: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-01/msg00951.html > was sufficient to get a C-only bootstrap working on solaris2.10 using > cc for stage1. > > I'm going to run a full test, but that'll take many many hours > longer. Ok, I've n

Re: Problem with gfortran or did I messsed up GMP installation?

Eric Botcazou wrote: Compile GMP 4.1.4: $ ../configure ABI=32 --prefix=/gcc-test --enable-mpfr Would you mind trying as documented in http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html#sparc-sun-solaris2 i.e. with --build=sparc-sun-solaris2.9 instead of ABI=32? Done. I got same thing (32-bit hell

Re: Attribute data structure rewrite?

Geoffrey Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> re this mail: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg01357.html >> >> do you still have the code around? Are you still willing to >> contribute it? >> Maybe you could upload it to a branch just to have it around in >> case someone is >> willing to u