In the current compiler, it seems very likely that every call to
decl_constant_value_for_broken_optimization can simply be removed.
The constant propagation passes should implement the optimization.
What about format checking for constant arrays? :-( That's the testcase
that Joseph wrote for
> At least on x86 it should also be a good idea to know which way
> the branch is going to go, because it doesn't have explicit branch
> hints, you really want to be able to optimize the cold branch
> predictor case if converting from cmov to conditional branches.
x86 as of Pentium 4 does have bra
Hello,
I get the following bootstrap failure on powerpc64-linux, trunk r132684
configure with:
--with-cpu=default32 --enable-checking --enable-bootstrap
Revital
libtool: compile: /home/revitale/mainline_branch/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/revitale/mainline_branch/build/./gcc/
-B/home/revitale/ma
This is PR373, see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg01134.html
for a fix.
Dominique
Hi,
not sure where the bug is - gcc 4.2.4pre (CVS), binutils 2.17,
cross compiler X86_64 -> ARM BE.
-O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fno-stack-protector -marm
-fno-omit-frame-pointer -mapcs -mno-sched-prolog -mabi=apcs-gnu
-mno-thumb-interwork -march=armv5te -mtune=xscale -mcpu=xscale
-msoft
"Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a draft FDPIC ABI for SH uClinux, based on the FR-V FDPIC ABI.
> Please send any comments; CodeSourcery will be implementing the final ABI
> version in GCC and Binutils.
Wow, great news!
One minor point I'm curious is the choice of the phy
On 27 February 2008 11:48, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> not sure where the bug is - gcc 4.2.4pre (CVS), binutils 2.17,
> cross compiler X86_64 -> ARM BE.
That asm looks a bit odd to me (but I haven't had much coffee today so I
could be reading it wrong):-
> #define get_user(x,p)
> > At least on x86 it should also be a good idea to know which way
> > the branch is going to go, because it doesn't have explicit branch
> > hints, you really want to be able to optimize the cold branch
> > predictor case if converting from cmov to conditional branches.
>
> x86 as of Pentium 4 d
Hello All,
{sent to the gcc@ mailing list and Bcc- to GlobalGCC partners}
This email is related to the plugin includes question
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-02/msg00373.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-02/msg00376.html within (in particular)
the MELT branch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008
"Dave Korn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> #define get_user(x,p)
>> \
>> ({ \
>> register const u8 __user *__p asm("r0") = (p); \
>> register
On 27 February 2008 13:07, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> "Dave Korn" writes:
>
>>> #define get_user(x,p)
\
>>> ({ \
>>> register const u8 __user *__p asm("r0") = (p); \
>>> register unsigned long __r2 as
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:40:37PM -, Dave Korn wrote:
> ^ '&' means output operand (zero)
> is early-clobber, so cannot share
> a register with any input operand.
> > : "0" (__p)
> This is also interesting for the ARC700 processor.
>
> There is also an issue if the flag for the conditionalized instruction is
> set in the immediately preceding instruction, and the result of the
> conditionalized instruction is required in the immediately following
> instruction, and if usin
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> "Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Here is a draft FDPIC ABI for SH uClinux, based on the FR-V FDPIC ABI.
> > Please send any comments; CodeSourcery will be implementing the final ABI
> > version in GCC and Binutils.
>
> Wow, great news!
>
Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the current compiler, it seems very likely that every call to
> > decl_constant_value_for_broken_optimization can simply be removed.
> > The constant propagation passes should implement the optimization.
>
> What about format checking for constant
On 27 February 2008 12:57, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> My MELT branch [originally I called it basilys] is (currently is not but
> should) generate C code during the cc1 execution
> The point is that every MELT generated C file is a plugin to the
> middle-end hence depends upon all the middle-e
Hello All,
A big thanks to Dave Korn, who wrote:
On 27 February 2008 12:57, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Practically, every MELT generated file has exactly one include directive:
#include "run-basilys.h"
the gcc/run-basilys.h is in the MELT branch and of course include many
other files eg
> Symbols with their address taken are only renamed when they appear as
> virtual operands. So, if you have:
>
> p_3 = (i_5 > 10) ? &a : &b
> a = 4
>
> notice that 'a' is never renamed in the LHS of the assignment. It's
> renamed as a virtual operand:
>
> p_3 = (i_5 > 10) ? &a : &
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> I'm trying to understand how other "plugin" related effort deals with
> this.
In an ideal world, you create a plugin API/ABI that is decoupled from
any of the internals of the main program and which has its own headers
and interface. Plugin authors simply code to th
On 27 February 2008 18:26, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> I'm trying to understand how other "plugin" related effort deals with
> this. Perhaps nobody really cares, but I tend to believe that any plugin
> effort should install the right *.h files outside of the source or build
> directories, for pl
Hello All,
Dave Korn wrote:
On 27 February 2008 18:26, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
So, since you are planning to compile the plugin during cc1 execution
anyway, why not just say that
- plugins are distributed as source
Yes, exactly. And to be more precise, all MELT plugin C code is
gener
Hello All,
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
I think it should be (in gcc/Makefile.in parlance)
$(DESTDIR)$(libexecsubdir)/melt-private-include/ and I should have some
Makefile.in trick to copy the relevant *.h there perhaps thru a
install-melt-includes target
The one detail I don't understand
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20080227 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20080227/
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
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Joe, what version of gcc are you using?
>
> $ gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 4.2.2 20071128 (prerelease) (4.2.2-3.1mdv2008.0)
>
> It's definitely odd.
> The .o size changes are inconsistent.
> Some get bigger, some get smaller.
>
> The versioning ones I un
I want to start a discussion about some possible changes to the RTL
level of GCC.
This discussion is motivated by some of the issues raised in bug
26854. We have addressed many of the issues in this bug, but the
remaining issue is cost, in both time and space, for the UD and DU
chains built by se
last 24 hrs I get this:
make[2]: Entering directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
make[3]: Entering directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
rm -f stage_current
make[3]: Leaving directory `/mnt/share/bld/gcc'
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap
>
> -static inline void __attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2)))
> -__simple_attr_check_format(const char *fmt, ...)
It would be nice to have a testcase, but I guess it is because GCC can't
inline variadic functions. The function gets identified as const and
removed as unused by DCE, but this happ
Register saves by prolog (pushes) are typically made with reference to
"df_regs_ever_live_p()" or "regs_ever_live. "||
If my understanding is correct, these calls reflect register USEs and
not register DEFs. So if register is used in a function, but not
otherwise changed, it will get pushed
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Andrew Hutchinson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Register saves by prolog (pushes) are typically made with reference to
> "df_regs_ever_live_p()" or "regs_ever_live. "||
>
> If my understanding is correct, these calls reflect register USEs and
> not register DEFs
Register contains parameter that is passed to function. This register
is not part of call used set.
If this type of register were modified by function, then it would be
saved by function.
If this register is not modified by function, it should not be saved.
This is true even if function is
You can use DF_REG_DEF_COUNT() - if this is indeed a parameter register,
there should be only one def (artificial def) or no def at all.
Or if you want to see all defs for the reg,
follow DF_REG_DEF_CHAIN().
Seongbae
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Andrew Hutchinson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Andrew Hutchinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Register contains parameter that is passed to function. This register
> is not part of call used set.
It's very odd to pass parameters in a register which the callee may
not modify. What target is this?
Ian
Thanks
I will check this.
DF Dump in RTL file does not list Artificial defs - which is what I
think I need. However, I do note that all potential parameter registers
(including those unused) - are listed as invalidated by call. - which
means 1 (or more) defs. So like you suggest I just need to fi
On Feb 27, 2008, Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The appeal for birthpoints is that unlike the abortive attempt in
> the past to add SSA to RTL, adding a noop moves does not really mess
> up anything.
IIRC, when people tried to do RTL SSA, the problem was with match_dups
in IN/OUT ope
On Feb 23, 2008, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 10:53:53AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 08:52:41PM +1100, Tim Josling wrote:
>> > I wrote a little proof-of-concept script to take the mailing list
>> > archives and the ChangeLog files a
Hello all,
I am studying vectorization in GCC.
I want to run the test cases given in gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect
Any pointer will be of great help for me.
Thanks in advance
Jaishri
On Feb 26, 2008, "Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a draft FDPIC ABI for SH uClinux, based on the FR-V FDPIC ABI.
> Please send any comments; CodeSourcery will be implementing the final ABI
> version in GCC and Binutils.
Cool! Great news!
> In the picture above, function
I think:
make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="vect.exp"
is what you're looking for.
Tehila.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 28/02/2008 08:32:21:
> Hello all,
> I am studying vectorization in GCC.
> I want to run the test cases given in gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect
> Any pointer will be of great help for me.
38 matches
Mail list logo
