Re: exception propagation support not enabled in libstdc++ 4.4 on {armeabi,hppa,sparc}-linux

Paolo Carlini schrieb: > Matthias Klose wrote: >> Paolo Carlini schrieb: >> >>> Paolo Carlini wrote: >>> Ok, thanks. Then, I think I'll implement this, for now. Seems in any case conservative to have a link type test identical to the one used in libgomp and libgfortran and a

Re: Problems with in-tree host libraries (gmp, ppl, etc)

Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote: On Sat, 2 May 2009, Anthony Green wrote: The top level configury suggests that you can simply drop gmp, ppl, etc into the top level source dir and they will get configured and used. Does this really work? It is supposed to. I haven't worked on or tested the ppl machiner

Re: Fwd: gcc instruction scheduling makes things worse?

> For data dependency cases, I do some jobs in > the adjust_cost target hook. Normally the scheduling takes into account the instruction latencies which you have specified: for load 2, for mul 4 and for alu 1. Why do you need to adjust the sched costs? Did you try simply without adjusting the c

Re: [Announcement] Creating lightweight IPO branch

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 2:47 AM, Richard Guenther > wrote: >> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >>> Hi, I am going to create a gcc branch for the functionality of >>> lightweight IPO. The description of the project

Re: exception propagation support not enabled in libstdc++ 4.4 on {armeabi,hppa,sparc}-linux

Matthias Klose wrote: > On arm-linux-gnueabi there are regressions of the form > > /usr/bin/ld: ./atomic-1.exe: hidden symbol `__sync_val_compare_and_swap_4' in > /home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcc-4.4-4.4.0/build/gcc/libgcc.a(linux-atomic.o) is > referenced by DSO > /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresen

Re: opaque vector types?

DJ Delorie wrote: > Andrew Pinski writes: >> You could do what the rs6000 back-end does for the altivec builtins >> and resolve them while the parser is run (the SPU back-end does the >> same thing too). Yes there are opaque vector types, you just use >> build_opaque_vector_type instead of build_

Multilib for ARM in thumb2 mode

Right now, to be able to compile a mutilib-enabled ARM-targeted compiler supporting thumb2, one has to uncomment some code in gcc/config/arm/t-arm-elf. Given that thumb2 processors are more and more used (such as microcontrollers based on the Cortex-M3), wouldn't it make sense to unconditionnaly co

Re: Problems with in-tree host libraries (gmp, ppl, etc)

> If the C and the C++ interface of GMP have been installed in the same > places, > specifying --with-libgmp-prefix[=DIR] is enough. > > If you think that being able to use a non-installed GMP build tree is > important, we can add an option to that effect. Yes, that would help. mpfr is using --

scheduling question

Hi, During scheduling Im confronted with the fact that an instruction is moved from the ready list to queued with the cost 2, while according to my expectations the insn should have been moved to queued with cost 1. Did anybody experience similar problem? In case an insn is ready but can bot be

Re: GCC 4.4.1 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:35:58PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > Status > == > > GCC 4.4.0 was released into the wild approximately two weeks ago, and > so far few serious defects have been reported. That's great! There > are, however, a copule of open P1s and a bevy of P2s -- most of whi

Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

A quick head's-up, in case anyone else runs into this or is working on it: Yesterday I installed the new ppl and cloog packages from my distro (Cygwin), and today GCC doesn't bootstrap. This is triggered by an unusual environment on my build machine, but I think it definitely exposes somethi

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Dave Korn writes: > I'm about to start looking through the config logs; if anyone knows anything > or has any ideas about this, please share! The problem is here in toplevel configure.ac: case $with_ppl in no) ppllibs= ;; *) ppllibs="-L$with_ppl/lib -lppl_c -lppl -lgmpxx $wit

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Andreas Schwab wrote: > Dave Korn writes: > >> I'm about to start looking through the config logs; if anyone knows >> anything >> or has any ideas about this, please share! > > The problem is here in toplevel configure.ac: > > case $with_ppl in > no) > ppllibs= > ;; > *) > p

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Dave Korn wrote: > > Heh, I was just about to post that, only I was looking at $clooginc rather > than $pplinc! The same problem exists for both; I'm pretty sure we should > fall back on $prefix if the --with option is empty. > When I bootstrapped gcc 4.5 on cygwin yesterday, configure recog

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Tim Prince wrote: > Dave Korn wrote: > >> Heh, I was just about to post that, only I was looking at $clooginc rather >> than $pplinc! The same problem exists for both; I'm pretty sure we should >> fall back on $prefix if the --with option is empty. >> > > When I bootstrapped gcc 4.5 on cygwin

Re: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 09:25 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Clearly, we have had a significant jump in P1 issues due to the major > changes made to the compiler middle-end. Let's drive that number > down -- otherwise it will be hard for other people to get their > improvements contributed. > The sl

Re: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> The slush that I requested last week has been lifted. However, I have >> asked for relative calm until the cond-optab branch has been merged to >> mainline, which will hopefully occur on Friday, May 8th. > > As of this morning (UK), native bootstrap on ARM is still bro

What precisely is the status of ppl/cloog anyway?

Sorry to have to ask a dumb question, but it's not clear to me and I'm not having a lot of luck searching recent list posts: Are cloog and ppl now mandatory requirements for building gcc, or are they still optional extras? cheers, DaveK

RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Richard Earnshaw wrote: > >>> The slush that I requested last week has been lifted. However, I have >>> asked for relative calm until the cond-optab branch has been merged to >>> mainline, which will hopefully occur on Friday, May 8th. >> >

Re: GCC 4.4.1 Status Report (2009-05-05)

Jack Howarth wrote: >Shouldn't PR3 be higher than a P3 since it puts the compiler > in an infinite loop and is a regression from gcc 4.3.x? P3 means "nobody has reviewed it yet". You filed it after I did my issue review yesterday. I've now upgraded it to P1. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourc

Re: What precisely is the status of ppl/cloog anyway?

Dave Korn wrote: > Sorry to have to ask a dumb question, but it's not clear to me and I'm not > having a lot of luck searching recent list posts: > > Are cloog and ppl now mandatory requirements for building gcc, or are they > still optional extras? Optional. Paolo

RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > >>> The slush that I requested last week has been lifted. However, I > >>> have asked for relative calm until the cond-optab branch has been > >>> merged to mainline, which will hopefully occur on Friday, May 8th. > >> > >> As of this morni

RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:44 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > > >>> The slush that I requested last week has been lifted. However, I > > >>> have asked for relative calm until the cond-optab branch has been > > >>> merged to mainline, whic

Re: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:44 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, 6 May 2009, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> >> > >>> The slush that I requested last week has been lifted.  However, I >> > >>> have asked for relative calm until th

Re: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:49 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > That won't work because the PIC register on ARM is a pseudo, so > > generating it during prologue generation is too late. It needs to exist > > before data flow analysis start

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Dave Korn wrote: > Tim Prince wrote: >> Dave Korn wrote: >> >>> Heh, I was just about to post that, only I was looking at $clooginc rather >>> than $pplinc! The same problem exists for both; I'm pretty sure we should >>> fall back on $prefix if the --with option is empty. >>> >> When I bootstrap

[JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Hi, As I'm sure everyone concerned is aware, libgcj is currently a bit of a monolith. Wighing in at 93M for a static archive, 73M for a shared library (win32), it exports 82720 symbols. Which is unfortunately 17184 more than the system limit (64k) for a Windows DLL. The idea of breakin

RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > The easiest solution would be to just make a note that you need the > > PIC register and then, when expanding the prologue emit the necessary > > instructions. IMO that makes sense as PIC register setup usually is > > something the prologue

RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05)

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:55 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > > > The easiest solution would be to just make a note that you need the > > > PIC register and then, when expanding the prologue emit the necessary > > > instructions. IMO that make

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

[ Boh! I allowed my emailer to autocomplete the address and misdirected this to the -patches list. Apologies for the reposting to gcc@, but it'll break the threading if I just send a forward to j...@. ] Hi, As I'm sure everyone concerned is aware, libgcj is currently a bit of a monolith.

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Tim Prince wrote: > > #include > > no such file > -I/include was set by configure. As you say, there is something bogus here. > > setup menu shows cloog installed in development category, but I can't find > any such include file. Does this mean the cygwin distribution of cloog is > broken?

Re: What precisely is the status of ppl/cloog anyway?

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Dave Korn wrote: >> Sorry to have to ask a dumb question, but it's not clear to me and I'm not >> having a lot of luck searching recent list posts: >> >> Are cloog and ppl now mandatory requirements for building gcc, or are they >> still optional extras? > > Optional. >

Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Michael Matz wrote: The easiest solution would be to just make a note that you need the PIC register and then, when expanding the prologue emit the necessary instructions. IMO that makes sense as PIC register setup usually is something the prologue does, like all the other register setups

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 12:03 -0400, Joern Rennecke wrote: > Michael Matz wrote: > >> The easiest solution would be to just make a note that you need the > >> PIC register and then, when expanding the prologue emit the > >> necessary instructions. IMO that makes sense as PIC register setup > >

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Richard Earnshaw wrote: The easiest solution would be to just make a note that you need the PIC register and then, when expanding the prologue emit the necessary instructions. IMO that makes sense as PIC register setup usually is something the prologue does, like all the

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote: > Richard Earnshaw: > >That won't work because the PIC register on ARM is a pseudo, so > >generating it during prologue generation is too late. It needs to exist > >before data flow analysis starts on the RTL. > > How about emitting a set at each pl

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Hello Dave, * Dave Korn wrote on Wed, May 06, 2009 at 06:09:05PM CEST: > > So I'm currently experimenting with a patch that adds a new option > "--enable-libgcj-sublibs" in libjava/configure.ac. I may need to add a > dummy-link-and-relink stage to get the interdependencies working right, or I

Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

Hi all, I'm reaching the final stages of my port of gcc to a custom microcontroller and at this point real world examples seem to work, I only have a few dozen tests of the testsuite which give me trouble. All those tests involve arithmetics on pointers (or labels), and I'm not sure if the tests

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Joern Rennecke wrote: > >> Richard Earnshaw: >>> That won't work because the PIC register on ARM is a pseudo, so >>> generating it during prologue generation is too late. It needs to exist >>> before data flow analysis starts on the RTL. >> How a

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Mark Mitchell wrote: > >> How about emitting a set at each place the PIC register is needed, > >> and making sure that gcse will will common these sets where > >> appropriate? > > > I'd rather not. -O0 code is bad enough already; and this just makes > > more work for

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hello Dave, * Dave Korn wrote on Wed, May 06, 2009 at 06:09:05PM CEST: [...] 1) Would this be a reasonable approach, specifically i) in adding a configure option to cause sublibraries to be built, and ii) in using gmake's $(filter) construct to crudely subdivide the lib

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Looks like something like this could be useful to avoid code > duplications in the backends: > > void > emit_insn_at_top (rtx insn) > { > rtx scan; > > gcc_assert (current_ir_type () != IR_RTL_CFGLAYOUT); > push_topmost_sequence (); > scan

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:26 PM, David Daney wrote: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> >> Hello Dave, >> >> * Dave Korn wrote on Wed, May 06, 2009 at 06:09:05PM CEST: > > [...] >>> >>> 1)  Would this be a reasonable approach, specifically i) in adding a >>> configure >>> option to cause sublibraries to be

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 18:29 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > Looks like something like this could be useful to avoid code > > duplications in the backends: > > > > void > > emit_insn_at_top (rtx insn) > > { > > rtx scan; > > > > gcc_assert

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Dave Korn wrote: > 1) Would this be a reasonable approach, specifically i) in adding a configure > option to cause sublibraries to be built, and ii) in using gmake's $(filter) > construct to crudely subdivide the libraries like this? At program startup the first library would be loaded, it would

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Richard Guenther wrote: > Is it not that maybe most of the exported symbols are not necessary and can > be made hidden? We already did that. This is the number of symbols in the public API. Andrew.

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > Or like alpha: > > > > insert_insn_on_edge (seq, single_succ_edge (ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR)); > > > > That's not for the PIC load, but should work okay as expand from SSA > > commits instructions on edges later. That actually seems even nicer > >

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Andrew Haley wrote: > Dave Korn wrote: > >> 1) Would this be a reasonable approach, specifically i) in adding a >> configure >> option to cause sublibraries to be built, and ii) in using gmake's $(filter) >> construct to crudely subdivide the libraries like this? > > At program startup the firs

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hello Dave, Hiya Ralf, > I don't yet see why you would need any kind of libtool hacking. Because of this: > You also have to ensure that the sub libraries are self-contained, or at > least their interdependencies form a directed non-cyclic graph (or you > will need

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

Hi, On Wed, 6 May 2009, Michael Matz wrote: > > There's already emit_insn_at_entry in cfgrtl.c. Would that work? > > Unfortunately not. That one also wants to immediately commit the just > inserted instructions, which doesn't work during the transition phase > from GIMPLE to RTL. But just q

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Bryce McKinlay wrote: > If you're going to go to all this trouble, why not consider making libgcj > compilable with the BC-ABI. Well, in my case, because I have no idea what that involves or implies. I was hoping to find a solution that I can get in during this current stage1 and it not be th

Re: [JAVA,libtool] Big libjava is biiiig.

Dave Korn wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: >> Dave Korn wrote: >> >>> 1) Would this be a reasonable approach, specifically i) in adding a >>> configure >>> option to cause sublibraries to be built, and ii) in using gmake's $(filter) >>> construct to crudely subdivide the libraries like this? >> At pr

archives broken?

It looks like a bunch of missing from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows what could be the cause? Paolo

[PATCH] Fix bootstrap when no --with-ppl/--with-cloog [was Re: What precisely is the status of ppl/cloog anyway?]

Dave Korn wrote: > Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Dave Korn wrote: >>> Sorry to have to ask a dumb question, but it's not clear to me and I'm not >>> having a lot of luck searching recent list posts: >>> >>> Are cloog and ppl now mandatory requirements for building gcc, or are they >>> still optional

Re: archives broken?

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > It looks like a bunch of missing from > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows > what could be the cause? > > Paolo > When was the great sourceware.org drive crash? cheers, DaveK

Re: archives broken?

2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : > It looks like a bunch of missing from > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing.  Anybody knows > what could be the cause? Relevant PRs 20336, 20588, 3119. Cheers, Manuel.

Re: archives broken?

Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > 2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : >> It looks like a bunch of missing from >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows >> what could be the cause? > > Relevant PRs 20336, 20588, 3119. I'm pretty sure I have a complete set of the messages. Andrew.

Re: Setting ARM PIC register (Was: RE: GCC 4.5.0 Status Report (2009-05-05))

> I.e. like so. It fixes the testcase and to my untrained eye the output > looks correct (at least there seems to be loads from something .PIC > related :) ). But better testing would be appreciated. A comment explaining who will call commit_edge_insertions like in the Alpha case would be nice

Re: [RFC] Get rid of awkward semantics for subtypes

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > we're almost ready to get rid of the awkward semantics that is implemented in > the middle-end and the optimizers for subtypes (INTEGER_TYPEs with a non-null > TREE_TYPE); this should overall simplify things, make the support for inv

Re: [RFC] Get rid of awkward semantics for subtypes

> What is missing to go forward with this plan? Almost nothing, but I'm benchmarking the change and I'm seeing degradation in some cases because move IVs are exposed and so are -fivopts' warts. > I am hitting type consistency problems again while trying to fix PR3 ... Ideally this should be

Re: [RFC] Get rid of awkward semantics for subtypes

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> What is missing to go forward with this plan? > > Almost nothing, but I'm benchmarking the change and I'm seeing degradation in > some cases because move IVs are exposed and so are -fivopts' warts. > >> I am hitting type consistency problems

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

Stelian Pop writes: > on TARGET_8W and TARGET_16: > 920928-1.c: > 1 struct{int c;}v; > 2 static long i=((char*)&(v.c)-(char*)&v) > 930326-1.c: > 1 struct > 2 { > 3 char a, b, f[3]; > 4 } s; > 5 > 6 long i = s.f-&s.b; > labels-3.c: >9 int f

Re: archives broken?

On Wed, 6 May 2009, Andrew Haley wrote: > Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > > 2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : > >> It looks like a bunch of missing from > >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows > >> what could be the cause? > > > > Relevant PRs 20336, 20588, 3119. > > I'm

Re: archives broken?

Andrew Haley writes: > Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> 2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : >>> It looks like a bunch of missing from >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows >>> what could be the cause? >> >> Relevant PRs 20336, 20588, 3119. > > I'm pretty sure I have a comp

Re: [RFC] Get rid of awkward semantics for subtypes

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> What is missing to go forward with this plan? >> >> Almost nothing, but I'm benchmarking the change and I'm seeing degradation in >> some cases because move IVs are exposed and so ar

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:19:55PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Stelian Pop writes: > > > on TARGET_8W and TARGET_16: > > 920928-1.c: > > 1 struct{int c;}v; > > 2 static long i=((char*)&(v.c)-(char*)&v) > > 930326-1.c: > > 1 struct > > 2 { > > 3 char a, b, f[3]; > >

Re: exception propagation support not enabled in libstdc++ 4.4 on {armeabi,hppa,sparc}-linux

* Matthias Klose wrote on Wed, May 06, 2009 at 09:44:07AM CEST: > On arm-linux-gnueabi there are regressions of the form > > /usr/bin/ld: ./atomic-1.exe: hidden symbol `__sync_val_compare_and_swap_4' in > /home/doko/gcc/4.4/gcc-4.4-4.4.0/build/gcc/libgcc.a(linux-atomic.o) is > referenced by DSO >

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

Stelian Pop writes: > I did spent a few hours looking but haven't had much luck. > > I tried tracing this one: >> >6 long i = s.f-&s.b; > and noticed that the pointers gets casted to 'long' (so they become integers > and no longer pointers) before the actual substraction is made. > > Of cours

[graphite] Weekly phone call notes

Hi folks, hi graphities, here you are with the latest notes from our graphite phone call. It is also available on the wiki: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite_Phone_Call/2009_05_06 All the best Tobi Attendees: Sebastian, Tobias, Christophe, Albert, Li, Jan, Razya, Konrad, Antoniu * Seb

Re: [graphite] Weekly phone call notes

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Tobias Grosser wrote: > Hi folks, hi graphities, > > here you are with the latest notes from our graphite phone call. > > It is also available on the wiki: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite_Phone_Call/2009_05_06 > > All the best > > Tobi > > > Attendees: Sebasti

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 01:23:57PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Stelian Pop writes: > > > I did spent a few hours looking but haven't had much luck. > > > > I tried tracing this one: > >> > 6 long i = s.f-&s.b; > > and noticed that the pointers gets casted to 'long' (so they become integers

Re: [RFC] Get rid of awkward semantics for subtypes

> I wonder for example about > > type asm_written public visited SI > size > unit size > align 32 symtab 1993070176 alias set -1 canonical type > 0x2b1d76cbe540 precision 32 min -2147483648> max > pointer_to_this > > sizes-gimplified asm_written public

Re: archives broken?

Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Andrew Haley writes: > >> Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >>> 2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : It looks like a bunch of missing from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows what could be the cause? >>> Relevant PRs 20336, 20588, 3119. >>

Re: archives broken?

On Wed, 6 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote: > Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > Andrew Haley writes: > > > >> Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > >>> 2009/5/6 Paolo Bonzini : > It looks like a bunch of missing from > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-02/ are missing. Anybody knows > what could

Re: archives broken?

Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote: >> I could have a rummage. I have a little experience with mhonarc, having >> installed and maintained some in-house mailing list archives in my last job. >> I never had to rebuild an index, but I recall reading that it's fairly >> s

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

Stelian Pop writes: >> I took a quick look at a similar case for x86, and the key step seems to >> be a call to ptr_difference_const. It converts the difference of two >> ADDR_EXPRs to a constant. > > in my case ptr_difference_const doesn't get called at all, because > the operands are no longer

Avoiding REG+OFF memory accesses

Sorry for such trivial question, but is there any macro that can be used to avoig GCC to generate REG+OFF memory accesses? So basically to force GCC to break: (mem (plus (reg const_int))) into (set regtmp (plus (reg const_int))) (set (mem regtmp) reg) This w/out writing custom RTL. Can you pl

Re: archives broken?

On Wed, 6 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote: > I see that MHonARc >= 2.6 supports this: > > http://www.mhonarc.org/MHonArc/doc/resources/reconvert.html > > which I think also does what we want, without any worries about changing > message numbers or over-feeding it creating dups. I'm just reading the

Re: archives broken?

Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Dave Korn wrote: > Given that the directory is corrupted, I wouldn't trust a reconvert script > to find the database in a suitable state. Use > infra/ml-archiving/ml-regen-from-txtfiles.sh, as referenced in >

Re: Issues with testsuite on constant pointer arithmetics

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 03:42:47PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Stelian Pop writes: > > There is something strange in your trees. Why did it convert the > pointers to "long int"? Why did it not simply convert them to "int"? > The fact that they are going to be assigned to a "long int" vari

Re: Bootstrap broken by ppl/cloog config problem: finds non-system/non-standard "/include" dir

Dave Korn wrote: Tim Prince wrote: #include no such file -I/include was set by configure. As you say, there is something bogus here. setup menu shows cloog installed in development category, but I can't find any such include file. Does this mean the cygwin distribution of cloog is broke

Re: Avoiding REG+OFF memory accesses

Iceman writes: > Sorry for such trivial question, but is there any macro that can be used to > avoig GCC to generate > REG+OFF memory accesses? > So basically to force GCC to break: > > (mem (plus (reg const_int))) > > into > > (set regtmp (plus (reg const_int))) > (set (mem regtmp) reg) > > Thi