Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:06:27PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > I had a question about interpretation of FDE's CIE_pointer field (for > .debug_frame) > > The spec say (from dwarf4 version although it really doesn't matter): > > "2. CIE_pointer (4 or 8 bytes, see Section 7.4) > A constant offset

Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Vineet Gupta
On 06/24/2013 12:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:06:27PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: >> I had a question about interpretation of FDE's CIE_pointer field (for >> .debug_frame) >> >> The spec say (from dwarf4 version although it really doesn't matter): >> >> "2. CIE_pointer (

Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:43:15PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote: > Pardon me if I sound dense (not really my area of expertise), wowever, the 2nd > word in FDE above (@.Lframe0) is a direct reference to start of .debbug_frame > shouldn't it be something like > > @.Lframe0 - @.Lframe0 > > i.e. zero.

Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Vineet Gupta
On 06/24/2013 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On most targets, .debug_* sections are placed at address 0, so absolute > relocations are the same as relocations relative to the start of the > section. > [snipped] > > So, either .debug_* sections are placed at address 0 and then absolute > relocatio

objdump for gimple [lto]

2013-06-24 Thread Paulo Matos
Hello, I see this item in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/LinkTimeOptimization : 7. Browsing/dumping tools for LTO files Is there anything already out there, even if half-baked? I am having trouble understanding a problem in LTO and I think the bug is in the writing of trees into the object file but

Re: objdump for gimple [lto]

2013-06-24 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Paulo Matos wrote: > Hello, > > I see this item in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/LinkTimeOptimization : > 7. Browsing/dumping tools for LTO files > > Is there anything already out there, even if half-baked? Nothing. > I am having trouble understanding a problem in

Question about conds attribute for *thumb2_alusi3_short

2013-06-24 Thread Tom de Vries
Richard, I've noticed that f.i. *thumb2_alusi3_short has no explicit setting of the conds attribute, which means the value of the conds attribute for this insn is nocond: ... (define_insn "*thumb2_alusi3_short" [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=l") (match_operator

Re: GCC talks at the GNU Hackers Meeting?

2013-06-24 Thread Luca Saiu
Hello Iain. I'm adding ghm-discuss in Cc. I think we shouldn't follow up on gcc@ any more at this point. Let's not bother the hardworking compiler masters :-). On 2013-06-24 at 01:15, Iain Buclaw wrote: > I did a similar such talk at DConf 2013 with my GCC front-end for the > D programming lan

[libgomp] MEMMODEL_* constants and OMP_STACKSIZE: a few questions/proposals

2013-06-24 Thread Kévin PETIT
Hi, I’ve recently started to work on libgomp with the goal of proposing a new way of handling queues of tasks based on the work done by a PhD student. While working on libgomp’s code I noticed two things that puzzled me: - The code uses gcc’s atomic builtins but doesn’t use the __ATOMIC_

Re: GCC talks at the GNU Hackers Meeting?

2013-06-24 Thread Iain Buclaw
On 24 June 2013 17:02, Luca Saiu wrote: > Hello Iain. I'm adding ghm-discuss in Cc. I think we shouldn't follow > up on gcc@ any more at this point. Let's not bother the hardworking > compiler masters :-). > > On 2013-06-24 at 01:15, Iain Buclaw wrote: > >> I did a similar such talk at DConf 20

Re: GCC talks at the GNU Hackers Meeting?

2013-06-24 Thread Luca Saiu
On 2013-06-24 at 19:14, Iain Buclaw wrote: > My talk at Dconf2013 can be bulleted into the following: > > - What is GDC? > - A brief history of porting the D language to GCC. > - D language and library support, including current challenges being faced. > - Introduction to GCC, in particular an ove

Re: GCC talks at the GNU Hackers Meeting?

2013-06-24 Thread Iain Buclaw
On 24 June 2013 18:38, Luca Saiu wrote: > On 2013-06-24 at 19:14, Iain Buclaw wrote: > >> My talk at Dconf2013 can be bulleted into the following: >> >> - What is GDC? >> - A brief history of porting the D language to GCC. >> - D language and library support, including current challenges being fac

Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Richard Henderson
On 06/24/2013 12:37 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote: > Aha, I see what's happening. For historical reasons, ARC Linux kernel stack > unwinder relies on .debug_frame (vs. .eh_frame) for stack unwinding. Being non > allocatable it would default to address zero hence the orig absolute > relocations > would wo

Re: Interpretation of DWARF FDE->CIE_pointer field for .debug_frame

2013-06-24 Thread Vineet Gupta
On 06/25/2013 12:35 AM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 06/24/2013 12:37 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote: >> Aha, I see what's happening. For historical reasons, ARC Linux kernel stack >> unwinder relies on .debug_frame (vs. .eh_frame) for stack unwinding. Being >> non >> allocatable it would default to addr

Re: Question about conds attribute for *thumb2_alusi3_short

2013-06-24 Thread Chung-Lin Tang
On 13/6/24 下午11:43, Tom de Vries wrote: > Richard, > > I've noticed that f.i. *thumb2_alusi3_short has no explicit setting of the > conds > attribute, which means the value of the conds attribute for this insn is > nocond: > ... > (define_insn "*thumb2_alusi3_short" > [(set (match_operand:SI