Re: Infinite loop in compiling javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.list

2007-10-31 Thread Dominique Dhumieres
A full bootstrap took 12h 38' on my machine (1.8Ghz G5) minus probably ~1h diverted for other tasks. Although I did not measured accurately this time before, it could be my fastest one. Most of the improvement from my original post comes from gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.deps, for

Extending jumps after block reordering

2007-10-31 Thread Gregory B. Prokopski
+++ Ian Lance Taylor [06/07/07 09:16 -0700]: > shorten_branches should work correctly--you shouldn't need to do > anything special. My only guess is that there is something wrong with > the way you are reordering the blocks. For example, perhaps you are > simply reordering the CFG without reorder

Re: Autovectorized HIRLAM - latest results.

2007-10-31 Thread Sebastian Pop
On Oct 29, 2007 10:49 AM, Dorit Nuzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wonder if it's versioning-for-aliasing (run-time dependence testing) that > was responsible for a lot of the new vectorizable loops > It is then possible that the code size noticeably increased. Toon could you provide more data

Re: GCC 4.3 release schedule

2007-10-31 Thread Matthias Klose
Richard Guenther writes: > On 10/26/07, Andrew MacLeod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Note that we are building what-becomes-openSUSE 11.0 with current trunk > > > in parallel to 4.2 at the moment, switching to 4.3 is in the next weeks > > > (unless I get pushed back again ;)). > > > > > > > > It

Re: Infinite loop in compiling javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.list

2007-10-31 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Most of the improvement from my original post comes from > gnu/javax/swing/text/html/parser/HTML_401F.deps, for which the compile time > went from over 100 minutes to below 10 (twice due to multilib). For all the > other pieces of code the saving (if any) was clearly well below a factor 2. > Doe

Re: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?

2007-10-31 Thread Jason Merrill
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: It appears that the draft C++0x memory model prohibits speculative stores. Therefore I now think we should aim toward prohibiting them unconditionally. I agree, or perhaps unless the user specifies a flag like -fthread-unsafe-opts or something. That memory model is

gcc-4.2-20071031 is now available

2007-10-31 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20071031 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20071031/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

gcc 4.3.0 revision 129794 on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00

2007-10-31 Thread Rainer Emrich
- --with-mpfr=/SCRATCH/gcc-build/HP-UX/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00/install - --with-local-prefix=/appl/shared/gnu/HP-UX/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.3.0 20071031 (experimental) (GCC) But using this as bootstrap compiler for itself results in the following error in stage 1: gcc -g