On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Tobi,
> Can you update the isl and cloog tarballs in the gcc infrastructure
> directory
> to the new isl 0.11.1 and cloog 0.18.0 releases from...
>
> ftp://ftp.linux.student.kuleuven.be/pub/people/skimo/isl//isl-0.11.1.tar.bz2
> http://ww
> Yes, doing much related to rounding modes really requires making the
> compiler respect them properly for -frounding-math. That's not quite
> calls being optimization barriers in general, just for floating point.
>
> * General calls may set, clear or test exceptions, or manipulate the
> rounding
Doug Evans wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:52 AM, nick clifton wrote:
> >> Switching to DWARF causes our build products directory (which contains
> >> *NONE* of the intermediate files) to swell from 1.2 GB to 11.5 GB.
> >> Ouch! The DWARF ELF files are 8-12 times the size of the STABS ELF
> >
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013, Michael Zolotukhin wrote:
> > Personally I'd think a natural starting point on the compiler side would
> > be to write a reasonably thorough and systematic testsuite for such
> > issues. That would cover all operations, for all floating-point types
> > (including ones such as
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:52 AM, David Taylor wrote:
> Doug Evans wrote:
>> So while plain dwarf may be 8-12x of stabs, progress has been made,
>> and we shouldn't base decisions on incomplete analyses.
>
> ...
>
> If I use objcopy --compress-debug-sections to compress the DWARF debug
> info (but
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20130111 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20130111/
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
>> If I use objcopy --compress-debug-sections to compress the DWARF debug
>> info (but don't use it on the STABS debug info), then the file size
>> ratio is 3.4.
>>
>> While 3.4 is certainly better than 11.5, unless I can come up with a
>> solution where the ratio is less than 2, I'm not currently
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Cary Coutant wrote:
>
> Next, I compiled a 5000-line C++ source file at both -O0 and -O2.
I have to assume that David is working with C code, as stabs debugging
for C++ is nearly unusable.
Ian
Hi all,
I believe the decision to use UNSPEC_CMP and UNSPEC_CMPU for microblaze
compare instructions stems from the conversation in this thread from 2009;
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-12/msg00283.html
This makes sense, because if I use code attributes and iterators to extend the
compare insn a
On 01/11/2013 06:53 PM, David Holsgrove wrote:
Hi all,
I believe the decision to use UNSPEC_CMP and UNSPEC_CMPU for microblaze
compare instructions stems from the conversation in this thread from 2009;
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-12/msg00283.html
Thanks for reminding me. I'd forgotten tha
10 matches
Mail list logo