2011/9/5 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:22:10AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > That said, relying on lazy binding is terribly bad design.
>>
>> In fact I was going to say why can't those symbols be marked as weak
>> in your pl
Hi,
I am doing a private port in GCC 4.5.1. For the my target i see some
strange behavior in delay slot scheduling. For my target the
instruction in the delay slots gets executed irrespective of whether
the branch is taken or not. I have generated the following code after
commenting out the call t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/06/11 08:46, Mohamed Shafi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am doing a private port in GCC 4.5.1. For the my target i see some
> strange behavior in delay slot scheduling. For my target the
> instruction in the delay slots gets executed irrespective of whet
Hi,
I compile the following code with arm gcc 4.6 (x86 is the similar with one of
4.7 snapshot).
I noticed "a" is written to memory three times instead of being added by 3 and
written at the
end. Doesn't restrict guarantee "a" won't be aliased to "p" so 3 "a++" can be
optimized?
Thanks,
Bingfe
> I am doing a private port in GCC 4.5.1. For the my target i see some
> strange behavior in delay slot scheduling. For my target the
> instruction in the delay slots gets executed irrespective of whether
> the branch is taken or not.
Early 4.5.x releases have known bugs in this area. You'd need
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi,
> I compile the following code with arm gcc 4.6 (x86 is the similar with one of
> 4.7 snapshot).
> I noticed "a" is written to memory three times instead of being added by 3
> and written at the
> end. Doesn't restrict guarantee "a" won't
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 06 September 2011 16:42
> To: Bingfeng Mei
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Is this correct behaviour?
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I compile the followin
On 09/05/2011 12:50 AM, Romain Geissler wrote:
Hi
Is there any particular reason to load plugin with the RTLD_NOW option?
This option force .so symbol resolution to be completely made at load time,
but this could be done only when a symbol is needed (RTLD_NOW).
Here is the dlopen line in plugin
On 09/06/2011 10:55 AM, David Daney wrote:
On 09/05/2011 12:50 AM, Romain Geissler wrote:
Hi
Is there any particular reason to load plugin with the RTLD_NOW option?
This option force .so symbol resolution to be completely made at load
time,
but this could be done only when a symbol is needed (R
"Bingfeng Mei" writes:
> Then how do I tell compiler that "a" is not aliased if I have to use global
> variable?
>
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> > Bingfeng Mei
>> >
>> > int a;
>> > int P[100];
>> > void foo (int * restrict p)
>> > {
>> > P[0] = *p;
>> > a++;
>> > P[1] = *p;
>> > a++;
>> > P[2] = *p
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20110906 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20110906/
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
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> asharif tools writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> asharif tools writes:
>>>
function:
call __i686.get_pc_thunk.bx
addl $_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_, %ebx
movl
On 6 September 2011 20:50, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 09/06/11 08:46, Mohamed Shafi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am doing a private port in GCC 4.5.1. For the my target i see some
>> strange behavior in delay slot scheduling. For my target the
>> instruction in the delay slots gets executed irrespective of w
13 matches
Mail list logo
