Andrew Pinski wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Andrew Pinski
>wrote:
>> I was creating a new gimple/folding interface and wanted some
>opinions
>> on the interface.
>>
>> typedef double_int (*nonzerobits_t)(tree var);
>> typedef tree (*valueizer_t)(tree var);
>>
>> class gimple_combine
>
Hi, all!
Earlier we (Samsung R&D Institute Rus) proposed to implement OpenACC for
GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg00060.html
We got our assignment form, now. I can attach signed and approved pdf,
if needed.
What should we do to get rights to create branch for OpenACC and submit
a
Hi All!
Unfortunately now the compiler generates wrong code for i686 target
when options -O3 and -flto are used. It started more than a month ago
and reflected in PR57602.
Such combination of options could be quite important at least from the
performance point of view.
Since there was almost no
On 07/22/2013 10:07 AM, Evgeny Gavrin wrote:
> Hi, all!
>
> Earlier we (Samsung R&D Institute Rus) proposed to implement OpenACC for
> GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg00060.html
>
> We got our assignment form, now. I can attach signed and approved pdf,
> if needed.
>
> What should we
Hello,
There are 42 test files (25 under gcc.dg) that specifies
{ dg-add-options bind_pic_locally }
in the regression testsuite. The procedure add_options_for_bind_pic_locally
from lib/target-supports.exp adds -fPIE or -fpie when -fPIC or -fpic is passed
respectively. But this is added before th
On 07/20/2013 02:09 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
gimple_combine(bool reas) : nonzerobitsf(NULL), valueizerv(NULL),
allow_full_reassiocation(reas) {}
I think this constructor should be marked "explicit".
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team
To the GCC Steering Committee,
Mentor Graphics has submitted, and recently re-submitted an updated
version, of a GCC backend port for the Altera Nios II architecture,
currently on gcc-patches awaiting technical review [1].
We're proposing, upon port approval and commit to trunk, Sandra
Loosemore
> -Original Message-
> From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 6:56 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: Ian Lance Taylor; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Help with using multilib for Cilk Library
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Iyer, Balaji V
> wrote:
> >
On 07/22/2013 03:07 AM, Evgeny Gavrin wrote:
Hi, all!
Earlier we (Samsung R&D Institute Rus) proposed to implement OpenACC for
GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg00060.html
We got our assignment form, now. I can attach signed and approved pdf,
if needed.
What should we do to get rights
On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 10:24 -0700, Hendrik Greving wrote:
> The enum opt_code in gcc/options.h looks like this;
>
> enum opt_code
> {
> N_OPTS,
> OPT_SPECIAL_unknown,
> OPT_SPECIAL_ignore,
> OPT_SPECIAL_program_name,
> OPT_SPECIAL_input_file
> };
>
> I have a feeling I am missing someth
On 07/22/2013 10:18 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Note there were two good BOF sessions at the GNU Cauldron last week on
accelerator support in GCC. I would strongly suggest you get in contact
with folks from those sessions. Recordings of those sessions ought to
show up relatively soon if they hav
Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/22/2013 03:07 AM, Evgeny Gavrin wrote:
Earlier we (Samsung R&D Institute Rus) proposed to implement OpenACC for
GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg00060.html
We got our assignment form, now.
Great! I am looking forward to the implementation!
I assume that you only
So I'm trying to get compare-and-branch working on my architecture. I
have the following patterns:
(define_expand "cbranchsf4"
[(set
(reg:CC CC_REGNO)
(compare:CC
(match_operand:SF 1 "register_operand")
(match_operand:SF 2 "register_operand")))
(set
(pc)
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:52:30PM -0300, Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> Please disregard this message in case it doesn't fit here.
>
> During compilation of a C file, I need to be able to create a global
> function definition, with whatever a body I may have forged. I
> "Diego" == Diego Novillo writes:
Diego> Have you any plans for other build system work?
Nope, no other plans.
This was just an unfinished item from long ago that Cauldron inspired me
to try to complete.
Tom
Hello,
Thanks! I had solved the problem some days ago, and it was actually
related to your answer.
First, I hadn't used push_struct_function() to allocate storage for my
new function.
Second, I wasn't calling finish_function() after setting my tree, so
it would not be further compiled (just like y
Is this hook still used? I don't see anything in the tool-chain
referring to it. It is documented however.
Regards,
Thanks,
Hendrik Greving
On 07/21/2013 08:14 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
I was creating a new gimple/folding interface and wanted some opinions
on the interface.
typedef double_int (*nonzerobits_t)(tree var);
typedef tree (*valueizer_t)(tree var);
class gimple_combin
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 01:36:17PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> Before designing an interface which inherently includes that
> information we should think hard about if it's valuable and if a
> tree combiner is the right place.
>
> I have high hopes that we can get the zero/sign extension
> eliminatio
I have uploaded all the slides I received to the wiki page.
If you presented a talk and do not see your slides in
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/cauldron2013, please fix the link
yourself or let me know and I'll add them to the table (if you
can fix the links yourself, you'll be doing me a big favour).
I'd like to make some changes to the GCC git-svn mirror. Specifically,
I want to move all the SVN branches from remotes/ into heads/ and split
the subdirectory branches (redhat, google, etc) into the individual
branches.
Should I leave the SVN branches as they are in remotes/ as well, for
ba
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> I'd like to make some changes to the GCC git-svn mirror. Specifically, I
> want to move all the SVN branches from remotes/ into heads/ and split the
> subdirectory branches (redhat, google, etc) into the individual branches.
>
> Should I lea
On 07/22/2013 02:39 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I'd like to make some changes to the GCC git-svn mirror. Specifically,
I want to move all the SVN branches from remotes/ into heads/ and split
the subdirectory branches (redhat, google, etc) into the individual
branches.
Should I leave the SVN branch
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> I'd like to make some changes to the GCC git-svn mirror. Specifically, I
> want to move all the SVN branches from remotes/ into heads/ and split the
> subdirectory branches (redhat, google, etc) into the individual branches.
Not sure if I c
I was wrong. It is used in varasm.c:named_section.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Hendrik Greving
wrote:
> Is this hook still used? I don't see anything in the tool-chain
> referring to it. It is documented however.
> Regards,
> Thanks,
> Hendrik Greving
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 6:56 PM
>> To: Iyer, Balaji V
>> Cc: Ian Lance Taylor; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Help with using multilib for Cilk Library
>>
On 07/22/2013 04:59 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I'd like to make some changes to the GCC git-svn mirror. Specifically, I
want to move all the SVN branches from remotes/ into heads/ and split the
subdirectory branches (redhat, google, etc) into
> Recently i am working on the atomic support for RTEMS. Our basic idea is to
> integrate the C11 atomic API into RTEMS. we have integrated the
> stdatomic.h into newlib which is used by RTEMS. And when we test the
> atomic ops on LEON3 platform (an important platform for RTEMS to test and
> verify
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 04:59 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>
>> Not sure if I completely understand, but would this change make it
>> easier to deal with subdirectory branches? It's pretty horrid now.
>
>
> That's the idea.
Excellent! In that case, I'
I run gcc with -fdump-tree-all-raw and found out that all dumps until
filename.c.013t.cfg are fine, but every time it fails, my function
disappears from filename.c.016t.ompexp onwards. Remembering: I want it
to happen every time there's a #pragma omp parallel in the source, so
I put my implementati
After porting/re-targeting a very old backend (own target) to GCC
4.8.1, I am getting this when compiling:
Fixing headers into /path/to/objdir/gcc/include-fixed for
moon-unknown-none target
No forbidden identifiers defined by this target
echo timestamp > stmp-fixinc
make[2]: *** No rule to make ta
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Hendrik Greving
wrote:
> After porting/re-targeting a very old backend (own target) to GCC
> 4.8.1, I am getting this when compiling:
>
> Fixing headers into /path/to/objdir/gcc/include-fixed for
> moon-unknown-none target
> No forbidden identifiers defined by this
I assume that you only target OpenACC support for C/C++ and not for
Fortran, do you?
Actually, Fortran is in our checklist, too.
BTW: The Cauldron 2013 recordings haven't shown up at YouTube, yet.
It would be great to see them!
--
Thanks,
Evgeny.
33 matches
Mail list logo
