On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Or I am missing someting?
>
> I often see the x86 vectorizer with -mtune=generic generate a lot of
> complicated code just to adjust for potential misalignment.
>
> My thought was just if the alias oracle knows what the original
> declaration i
Can I submit a patch for it? Or is it a small thing that patch is not necessary?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:38 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'
Subject: Re: Question about defaul
I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It was suggested that
the code most likely to produce this relocation would involve some sort
of tail recursion. I wr
Recently I've been taking a foray into the ARM ABI to port the Glasgow
Haskell Compiler's internal linker to ARM. One question I've run into is
how to handle the case of interworking with R_ARM_JUMP24. This
particular relocation could be generated often by GHC as a result of
tail call optimization.
On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
> According to the ELF for ARM specification, this case requires the
> generation of veneer code to handle the instruction set switch. My
> question is where can one reliably place this veneer such that it is
> within the 2^11 window permitted by the relevant in
On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
> I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
> of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
> R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It was suggested that
> the code most likely to produce this relocation wo
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:38:26 +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
> > I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
> > of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
> > R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It wa
"Iyer, Balaji V" writes:
> Can I submit a patch for it? Or is it a small thing that patch is not
> necessary?
I will preapprove such a patch for anybody with commit access.
Ian
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:
Attached, please find a patch fixing this issue.
2011-10-14 Balaji V. Iyer
* varasm.c (default_elf_asm_named_section): Removed ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED
tag
before decl.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
Sent: Frid
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20111014 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20111014/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hello.
Quote from ISO_IEC_14882-2011, 5.1.2/10:
> The identifiers in a capture-list are looked up using the usual rules for
> unqualified name lookup (3.4.1); each
> such lookup shall find a variable with automatic storage duration declared in
> the reaching scope of the local
> lambda expressio
11 matches
Mail list logo
