Re: Processing global static (or const) variables

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:50 AM, Ehren Metcalfe wrote: > (Apologies to Richard for sending this twice -- I forgot to cc the list) > >> At which point during the compilation does it not work?  I suppose >> at the point where the qualified variants are already optimized away. > > I've had some diffic

lower subreg optimization

Hi, I have encountered several problems with lower subreg optimization in my port. In some cases I noticed that insns are decomposed in subreg1 pass and do not get recomposed later which causes at the end using two insns instead of one. For example I have the following dump before subreg1 (note

GCC 4.5 Branch Created

The GCC 4.5 release branch has been finally created today. We are now in Stage 1 on the mainline. Please go ahead and begin checking in approved patches. Please try to coordinate so that we do not have multiple overlapping radical changes. Please announce your intent to commit a major in advanc

Bad behavior of ce1 on arm

The first if-conversion pass causes performance drop on arm. For example on this code: int f(int c) { int z = 0; if( c ) z = 0x; else z = 0x; return z; } It tries to transform the conditional code to if_then_else using the

Re: Where can I put the optimization of got for arm back end at?

It is the base of GOT that is loaded once in the function prologue. But for individual global variable's access, the address of the global variable is loaded from GOT every time the global variable is accessed after expand pass. For example, compile the following function with options -Os -fpic -mt

Re: GCC 4.5 Branch Created

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The GCC 4.5 release branch has been finally created today. Please, add gcc-4_5-branch to git mirror.

GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

A GCC 4.5.0 release candidate is available at: ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5.0-RC-20100406/ Please test the tarballs and report any problems to Bugzilla. CC me on the bugs if you believe they are regressions from previous releases severe enough to block the 4.5.0 release. Thanks

Re: GCC 4.5 Branch Created

On 04/06/2010 09:39 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: The GCC 4.5 release branch has been finally created today. Please, add gcc-4_5-branch to git mirror. Done. Jason

Re: VTA/debugging vs reload-v2

On 04/06/10 00:35, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:18:35PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: 2. When renaming references from P to P' in a region, do take debug insns in the region into account, renaming references in debug insns as you would in any other insn. OK. So presuma

Re: VTA/debugging vs reload-v2

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:23:09AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> But I guess for reload2 you'll be >> changing just REGs and MEMs to other REGs and MEMs - in that case >> just a replacement through say for_each_rtx is possible too. >> > Yea, we're going to have to walk down the expression with

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 AM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > > Hello all! > > I've put up a short diagnostics comparison between gcc, icc, and > clang. It is my plan to update this with major revisions to individual > compilers. > > Included are most of the outstanding bugzilla requests with the > "

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:00:16AM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > I wrote a little blog post that shows off some of the things that Clang can > do. It would be great to improve some of GCC/G++'s diagnostics in a similar > way: > > http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recover

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 03:45:27PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > A GCC 4.5.0 release candidate is available at: > > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5.0-RC-20100406/ > > Please test the tarballs and report any problems to Bugzilla. > CC me on the bugs if

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

On 6 April 2010 18:00, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 AM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > >> >> Hello all! >> >> I've put up a short diagnostics comparison between gcc, icc, and >> clang. It is my plan to update this with major revisions to individual >> compilers. >> >> Included are mo

Re: lower subreg optimization

On 04/06/2010 02:24 AM, roy rosen wrote: (insn 33 32 34 7 a.c:25 (set (subreg:V2HI (reg:V4HI 114) 0) (plus:V2HI (subreg:V2HI (reg:V4HI 112) 0) (subreg:V2HI (reg:V4HI 113) 0))) 118 {addv2hi3} (nil)) Only subregs are decomposed. So use vec_select instead of subreg. I see

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

On Apr 6, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> Hi Benjamin, >> >> I wrote a little blog post that shows off some of the things that Clang can >> do. It would be great to improve some of GCC/G++'s diagnostics in a similar >> way: >> >> http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-cl

Re: Help with an Wierd Error

On 04/02/2010 11:02 AM, balaji.i...@gtri.gatech.edu wrote: /opt/or32/lib/gcc/or32-elf/4.2.2/../../../../or32-elf/lib/crt0.o: In function `loop': (.text+0x64): undefined reference to `___bss_start' It looks like a case of one-too-many underscores prepended to symbol names. The default for ELF

Re: lower subreg optimization

roy rosen writes: > I have encountered several problems with lower subreg optimization in my port. > In some cases I noticed that insns are decomposed in subreg1 pass and > do not get recomposed later which causes at the end using two insns > instead of one. In the code the register is always ac

Re: lower subreg optimization

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:58:23AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > In the code the register is always accessed via a subreg, so the > lower-subregs pass thinks that it is OK to decompose the register. > Once it is decomposed, nothing is expected to put it back together. > > To fix this, you shoul

Re: lower subreg optimization

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > I realize > e500v2 is not exactly a mainstream target, but perhaps a target hook is > appropriate here Big hammer. Preferred tool for jobs in the real world. >  I suppose checking costs might achieve the same > thing. Small hammer. Preferred

Re: Bootstrap failures on i386-pc-solaris2.10

Arthur Haas writes: > I'll update my repo shortly and replace the '--with-arch' and '--with-tune' > arguments as you suggest. As for the '--disable-libstdcxx-pch' > argument, I had build problems months ago and this argument fixed the > problem, although now looking at the configure script for

Re: Bad behavior of ce1 on arm

> So what can we do? We can make the if-conversion pass avoid emitting > conditional moves when it results in using additional registers. But > although we know it's good on arm, we cannot say the same for other > architectures. However we can add a flag and enable it on arm by > default. Ideally

Re: lower subreg optimization

Nathan Froyd writes: > Compiling anything that uses doubles on powerpc e500v2 produces awful > code due in part to lower-subregs (the register allocator doesn't help, > either, but that's a different story). Code that looks like: > > rY:DI = r:DI > rX:DI = rY:DI > (subreg:DF rZ:DI 0) = rX:

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

I just downloaded the 20100406 snapshot and tried to build, however, could not get cloog-ppl to build.  I know it's not mandatory, but there's an issue here. I pulled down both ppl and cloog-ppl from the same location as the snapshot, so ppl-0.10.2 and cloog-ppl-0.15.9.  On a Centos

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

> >> http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recovery.html > > > > ...As it happens, some C++ diagnostics are better than the > > same diagnostic for C and viceversa. On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:45:11AM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > I think all the C examples are also valid C++

Re: lower subreg optimization

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 11:55:01AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Nathan Froyd writes: > > Compiling anything that uses doubles on powerpc e500v2 produces awful > > code due in part to lower-subregs (the register allocator doesn't help, > > either, but that's a different story). > > I doubt tha

Re: lower subreg optimization

On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > This code is sort of weird, though; why the conversion from DImode to > DFmode? See for discussion of the e500 subregs and their semantics. I made them work reliably (for 4.3 and later, 4.4

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Jerome Quinn wrote: undefined reference to `mp_get_memory_functions' This means your version of GMP is too old. configure should probably catch this. -- Marc Glisse

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Jerome Quinn wrote: > >> undefined reference to `mp_get_memory_functions' > > This means your version of GMP is too old. configure should probably catch > this. What is the minimum gmp for cloog-ppl? Is it the same as for g

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On 6 April 2010 21:10, Jerome Quinn wrote: > > What is the minimum gmp for cloog-ppl?  Is it the same as for gcc?  My > system gmp is too old for gcc so I've got gmp 4.3.2 placed in the gcc > source tree per the instructions.  It would be nice to have cloog use > the gmp that will be built as part

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 12:02 -0700, Joe Buck wrote: > > >> http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recovery.html > > > > > > ...As it happens, some C++ diagnostics are better than the > > > same diagnostic for C and viceversa. > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:45:11AM -0700, Chris L

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> source tree per the instructions.  It would be nice to have cloog use >> the gmp that will be built as part of the gcc bootstrap. >> >> Is there a clean way of making that happen? > > Can't you just put the cloog sources in-tree as well? T

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

On 6 April 2010 22:02, Jerome Quinn wrote: > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> source tree per the instructions.  It would be nice to have cloog use >>> the gmp that will be built as part of the gcc bootstrap. >>> >>> Is there a clean way of making that happen? >> >> Can't

Re: GCC 4.5.0 release candidate available

ay to get cloog to use a gmp you haven't built yet. If I try this the build still fails. It's not picking up the ppl that is in the gcc source tree. The ppl dir is named ppl and the cloog dir is named cloog. It appears to be ignoring the ppl in the gcc source tree... checking for sys

gcc-4.4-20100406 is now available

Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100406 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100406/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

Re: RFC: c++ diagnostics

Laurent GUERBY wrote: On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 12:02 -0700, Joe Buck wrote: http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recovery.html ...As it happens, some C++ diagnostics are better than the same diagnostic for C and viceversa. On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:45:11AM -0700, Chris Lattn

why mult generated for unsigned int multiply on mips?

Hi : I noticed that on mips, the signed form instruction of multiply is generated for unsigned integer multiply operation. for example, mult is used, rather than multu for following codes: unsigned int x, y, z; x = y * z; Is it reasonable to do so? Thanks. -- Best Regards.