Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> Are rpaths as portable as shared libraries or do we support a host
>> architecture that has shared libraries but no equivalent to rpath?
>
> Windows (mingw) comes to mind at least.
Cygwin too, of course, and I think Darwin may have some quirks in that area
as well.
I want to get data dependence information about an basic block, which
contains RTLs.
What functions or data structure should I use ?
thanks
--
Jianzhang Peng
Data dependence analysis is done in sched-deps.c. You can have a look
at build_intra_loop_deps function in ddg.c (which constructs data
dependency graph for modulo scheduler) to see how it is used.
Bingfeng
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org]
Hello
To me it looks like, that support for Thread Local Storage exists on ARM
cpu's.
When needed the compiler is going to fetch the base pointer by a
internal __builtin_thread_pointer() call.
This is either a call to __aeabi_read_tp() or a Coprocessor fetch
instruction.
If I'm going to impl
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 02:28:36PM +, Thomas Klein wrote:
> Dose anyone know the reason why they are not clobbered?
So that they don't have to be saved. This function is supposed to be
very fast. If you want to use a slow implementation, write an
assembly wrapper which saves additional regis
Hello
> > Dose anyone know the reason why they are not clobbered?
>
> So that they don't have to be saved. This function is supposed to be
> very fast. If you want to use a slow implementation, write an
> assembly wrapper which saves additional registers.
This might be the initial plan.
But is
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 05:09:38PM +, Thomas Klein wrote:
> This might be the initial plan.
> But is this true?
It is true because a typical implementation of this function has no
need to clobber registers. For instance, glibc's calls a kernel
helper this way:
0x00015810 <__aeabi_read_tp+0>:
Hello
> > But is this true?
> It is true because a typical implementation of this function has no
> need to clobber registers. For instance, glibc's calls a kernel
> helper this way:
Ah. now I understand, you require to have a virtual memory system (or
similar) that is translating the call in
On 12/02/09 13:29, Ian Bolton wrote:
I had an epiphany this morning and came up with an idea to achieve the
lookahead I thought I needed, thereby making the costs created by '?' a
lot more concrete and reliable.
Firstly, I have altered the alt_cost adjustment (for '?') in ira-costs.c,
so that i
* Jack Howarth wrote on Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 03:22:56AM CET:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:08:49PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > >
> > > The Libtool update would fix a couple of bugs, one of which is important
> > > for mi...@least. Any chance th
Who Would Have Figured You Could...
Do Everything 10,000 Times Faster?
Now You Can. Discover How Easy it Is Here
http://ez-web-solutions.net.tc
Much Success in all Your Endeavors,
~David
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > Are rpaths as portable as shared libraries or do we support a host
> > architecture that has shared libraries but no equivalent to rpath?
>
> Windows (mingw) comes to mind at least.
If the hypothetical libiberty.dll were only used by cc1 etc. (not by
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 09:32:38PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> Do you need anything to test the patch before it is applied, or did you
> mean to test it when it has been applied? (To test this patch that does
> not include regenerated files, apply it, then
> find $srcdir -name configure |
* Jack Howarth wrote on Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 10:15:59PM CET:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 09:32:38PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> > Do you need anything to test the patch before it is applied, or did you
> > mean to test it when it has been applied? (To test this patch that does
> > not inclu
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>
>>> Are rpaths as portable as shared libraries or do we support a host
>>> architecture that has shared libraries but no equivalent to rpath?
>> Windows (mingw) comes to mind at least.
>
> If the hypothetical libiberty.dll were
2009/12/3 Dave Korn :
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>>
Are rpaths as portable as shared libraries or do we support a host
architecture that has shared libraries but no equivalent to rpath?
>>> Windows (mingw) comes to mind at least.
>>
>> If the hyp
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20091203 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20091203/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
> When a pseudo which has an equivalent form (via the REG_EQUIV note) fails to
> get a hard register, reload deletes the insn which sets the pseudo and
> instead will reload the equivalent form into a suitable hard register prior
> to use points.
>
> What you want to do is look at the reloads gener
18 matches
Mail list logo
