Re: gomp slowness

On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > As I said before, the register is only stolen for code which actually > > > uses TLS. > > > > So scanning that document, for x86_64, fs is used in startup > > code, presumably if, and o

Re: gomp slowness

skaller wrote : I can tell you I definitely considered using FS for the Felix thread frame pointer to save passing that pointer between every function.. But then, won't you end up with an implementation very similar to __thread?? -- Sylvain Pion INRIA Sophia-Antipolis Geometrica Project-Team

Re: gomp slowness

On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 10:35 +0100, Sylvain Pion wrote: > skaller wrote : > > I can tell you I definitely considered using FS for the > > Felix thread frame pointer to save passing that pointer > > between every function.. > > But then, won't you end up with an implementation very similar > to __

RE: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in concert with some induction variable detection, since the most profitable place for this will be in loops. I

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

Hi, > I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > > To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in > concert with some induction variable detection, since the most > profitable place for this will b

RE: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

2007/11/3, Kenneth Zadeck wrote: > I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > > To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in > concert with some induction variable detection, since the most > profi

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

Zdenek Dvorak wrote: > Hi, > > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. >> >> To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in >> concert with some induction variable detection, since the most >

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

J.C. Pizarro wrote: > 2007/11/3, Kenneth Zadeck wrote: > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. >> >> To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in >> concert with some induction variable d

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

2007/11/3, J.C. Pizarro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They need to add an algorithm post-SSA that the code reuse the variables > converting a_j <- phi(a_i,...) to a_k <- phi(a_k,...). I'm sorry, "a_k <- phi(a_k,...)" is invalid due to SSA form definition, but this algorithm need some form to repres

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

2007/11/3, Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > J.C. Pizarro wrote: > > They need to add an algorithm post-SSA that the code reuse the variables > > converting a_j <- phi(a_i,...) to a_k <- phi(a_k,...). > > > > The algorithms of POST_INC and POST_DEC are very specific, so an above > > gener

GNAT is required to build ada

Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am seeing configure fail with... configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada ...when ada is added to the language set. Certainly this isn't the desired behavior. Jac

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

> Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the > ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am > seeing configure fail with... > > configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada Yes, that's the expected and documented behavior. Arno

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

Hi, > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > >> > >> To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in > >> concert with some induction variable detection, since the most > >> profitable plac

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

Jack Howarth wrote: Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am seeing configure fail with... configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada ...when ada is added to the language set. Certainly this isn't the desired behav

RE: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

Yes, that is the better way to generate code than using POST_INC since it eliminates unnecessary dependency. Which version used to do this? Where should it be done? I am thinking one of those copy propagation passes. Am I right? Cheers, Bingfeng -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

On 11/3/07, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > > >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > > >> > > >> To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in > > >> concert with some

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Arnaud Charlet wrote: >> configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada > Yes, that's the expected and documented behavior. Jack, we tried to write this down in the step-by-step instructions you'll find at . Is there anything we could do to improv

Re: undocumented optimization options

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Janis Johnson wrote: > -fipa-cp steven > -fipa-matrix-reorg razya > -fipa-pure-const zadeck (enabled with -O) > -fipa-referencezadeck (enabled with -O) > -fipa-type-escape zadeck > -fvar-tracking-uninit ctice > > Is there a po

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

Jack Howarth wrote: Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am seeing configure fail with... configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada ...when ada is added to the language set. To wit: Debian "testing" doesn't in

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

On 11/3/07, Toon Moene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jack Howarth wrote: > > > Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the > > ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am > > seeing configure fail with... > > > > configure: error: GNAT is required to build ada > > > > ..

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

Richard Guenther wrote: On 11/3/07, Toon Moene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To wit: Debian "testing" doesn't include GNAT in it's gcc-4.2.3 version either. Don't know why, however. Because it doesn't build on all required archs. See http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gnat-4.2.html But using t

Re: undocumented optimization options

On 11/1/07, Janis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Several options reported by --help=optimize are not documented in the > GCC Manual (via invoke.texi) but are still reported with > --help=optimize,^undocumented. Here are the options along with the > people who checked in the entries to common

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

From: Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:40:34 -0400 > Jack Howarth wrote: > > Is an external copy of GNAT really required to build the > > ada language in gcc trunk? On powerpc-apple-darwin9, I am > > seeing configure fail with... > > > > configure: error: GNAT is requi

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

David Miller wrote: But we don't need a fortran compiler to compile the gfortran compiler, and we don't need a c++ compiler to compile the g++ compiler, and we don't even need a java compiler to compile the gcj compiler. That's because they are written in C Sorry, I just couldn't resist. Th

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

From: Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:40:56 -0400 > David Miller wrote: > > > But we don't need a fortran compiler to compile the gfortran compiler, > > and we don't need a c++ compiler to compile the g++ compiler, and we > > don't even need a java compiler to compile t

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

On 2007/11/3, "David Miller" wrote: > The trick is to have a program that, even if massively suboptimal, can > compile ADA code for the purposes of bootstrapping the ADA compiler > and is written in C. There are many tricks. A) Works gnats from gcc-2.93.3? gcc-3.4.6? ... B) Anyone has to compile

Re: Results of 7z-4.55 performance with current GCCs.

--- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:42:01 -0400 > > > I agree with you 100%. It has always been my view > that if you can't > > compile fast enough, then get another machine and > use distcc, or get a > > quad core and d

Re: Tree-SSA and POST_INC address mode inompatible in GCC4?

On 11/3/07, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/3/07, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > > > >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > > > >> > > > >> To fix this will requir

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

David Miller wrote: The trick is to have a program that, even if massively suboptimal, can compile ADA code for the purposes of bootstrapping the ADA compiler and is written in C. No trick here, Ada is a complex language and even a "simple" Ada compiler that you envision is a huge amount of w

Re: GNAT is required to build ada

Robert Dewar wrote: No trick here, Ada is a complex language and even a "simple" Ada compiler that you envision is a huge amount of work, but if you feel it is practical, by all means go ahead and create such a beast! By the way, early on we thought quite a bit about how to bootstrap from C (t

Re: Results of 7z-4.55 performance with current GCCs.

From: Ted Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 21:32:43 -0400 (EDT) > On a different note, I wish I had your budget for > hardware. :-) What budget? These systems sit right at here with me at home, and I got all of them for free.

Re: Results of 7z-4.55 performance with current GCCs.

--- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Ted Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 21:32:43 -0400 (EDT) > > > On a different note, I wish I had your budget for > > hardware. :-) > > What budget? > > These systems sit right at here with me at home, and > I got all of them

Re: Results of 7z-4.55 performance with current GCCs.

On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 01:32:16AM -0400, Ted Byers wrote: > --- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Ted Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 21:32:43 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > On a different note, I wish I had your budget for > > > hardware. :-) > > > > What budget? > >

Re: Results of 7z-4.55 performance with current GCCs.

From: Ted Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 01:32:16 -0400 (EDT) > --- David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Ted Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 21:32:43 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > On a different note, I wish I had your budget for > > > hardware. :-) > >