Re: Adding Rounding Mode to Operations Opcodes in Gimple and RTL

Thanks for the responses! I'll think about your warnings and decide whether I could afford such effort or not, but anyway, I wanted to start from GCC, not glibc. Am I getting it right, that before any other works we need to fix PR 34678 (that's correct number, thanks Mark!), making all passes take

ICE: in bitmap_set_replace_value

Hello all, trying to compile bash-4.2 with the gcc-4.8-20130106 snapshot I get the following error: gcc -DPROGRAM='"bash"' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='"i686"' -DCONF_OSTYPE='"linux-gnu"' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='"i686-pc-linux-gnu"' -DCONF_VENDOR='"pc"' -DLOCALEDIR='"/usr/share/locale"' -DPACKAGE='"bash"' -D

Re: ICE: in bitmap_set_replace_value

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:43 AM, thorsten wrote: > Hello all, > >> trying to compile bash-4.2 with the gcc-4.8-20130106 snapshot I get the >> following error: >> >> gcc -DPROGRAM='"bash"' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='"i686"' >> -DCONF_OSTYPE='"linux-gnu"' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='"i686-pc-linux-gnu"' >> -DCONF_VEND

Synopsys DesignWare ARC Port

I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has accepted the Synopsys DesignWare ARC port for inclusion in GCC and appointed Joern Rennecke as maintainer. Please join me in congratulating Joern on his new role. Joern, please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file.

Re: Adding Rounding Mode to Operations Opcodes in Gimple and RTL

On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Michael Zolotukhin wrote: > Thanks for the responses! > I'll think about your warnings and decide whether I could afford such > effort or not, but anyway, I wanted to start from GCC, not glibc. > Am I getting it right, that before any other works we need to fix PR > 34678 (tha

Stellaris Non-Word-Aligned Write to SRAM Erratum

Hi all, The latest errata for Texas Instruments' Cortex-M3 family, updated last October [1], contains a disturbing new problem triggered by non-word-aligned writes to SRAM. This is the kind of errata that is effectively addressed with a compiler work-around. FWIW, it has already been addressed by

Query regarding atomic builtins

Hello All, I recently joined this mailing list and I was particularly interested in knowing how the atomic built-ins (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.1/gcc/Atomic-Builtins.html) are implemented in gcc. I skimmed through the source code (mostly libgcc/sync.c file), however it looks like it i

Re: Query regarding atomic builtins

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Prasad Joshi wrote: > > I recently joined this mailing list and I was particularly interested > in knowing how the atomic built-ins > (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.1/gcc/Atomic-Builtins.html) are > implemented in gcc. > > I skimmed through the source code

Re: GCC Cauldron: Notes from the C++ ABI BOF

> We had a useful discussion about C++11 ABI issues at the GNU Tools > Cauldron (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2012). The approach will be > shaped over time, but the general idea is as follows. > > We will modify g++ to support a type attribute indicating the version > of the type, as a string.