For my VLIW toolchain, I am not allowed to output .loc directives in the
middle of a VLIW bundle. Following the lead of the bfin backend, I scan
bundles during the machine reorg pass and ensure that all of the insns
of a bundle have the same location. This solves most of the problems,
but final
On 05/11/13 05:17, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> Is the following patch OK to fix this issue?
>
Balaji,
the patch fixes the problem for me, thanks.
I can't approve your patch, but it looks good to me.
FWIW, I stumbled upon this text at http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html
which is related to t
My non-bootstrap build fails with the following message
/bin/bash: ./libtool: No such file or directory
make: *** [cilk-abi-vla.lo] Error 127
I have my libtool installed in /usr/bin.
I configured the build with
configure --prefix=../dailybuild/usr/Nov_05_2013
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran -
> If you're referring to mudflap (Frank Eigler's work),
> ...
> It never reached a point where interoperability across objects with
and without mudflap instrumentation worked
Jeff,
Could you add more details? E.g. I don't see how mudflap
interoperability is different from AdressSanitizer whic
On 11/04/2013 05:43 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
You might also be referring to Greg McGary's work on bounded pointers, I don't
think that ever got integrated or if it did, it got pulled long ago.
It was integrated in 2000, removed in 2002/2003 (I removed the
On 05/11/13 10:37, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote:
> My non-bootstrap build fails with the following message
>
> /bin/bash: ./libtool: No such file or directory
> make: *** [cilk-abi-vla.lo] Error 127
>
> I have my libtool installed in /usr/bin.
>
> I configured the build with
> configure --pr
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 01:29:10PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
>> > Consider this:
>> >
>> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-10/msg02329.html
>> >
>> > and
>> >
>> > http://g
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tom de Vries [mailto:tom_devr...@mentor.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 2:15 PM
>> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> Cc: Iyer, Balaji V
>> Subject: libcilkrts breaks non-bootstrap build
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Whe
I've looked at optimizing dynamic_cast to final C++ class. In theory,
it should be possible to load the vtable pointer, compare it to the
expected value, and use the original pointer if it matches, or NULL
otherwise (for pointers, references are similar but need the conditional
throw).
But I
On 11/05/2013 01:36 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
I've looked at optimizing dynamic_cast to final C++ class. In theory,
it should be possible to load the vtable pointer, compare it to the
expected value, and use the original pointer if it matches, or NULL
otherwise (for pointers, references are si
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Tom de Vries wrote:
> FWIW, I stumbled upon this text at http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html
> which is related to this patch, and also to the top-level part of your commit
> r204173, which is missing at 'src':
Note there are now *three* repositories to keep in sync - GC
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 12:56:39PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 01:29:10PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> >> > Consider this:
> >> >
> >> > http://gcc.gnu.o
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2013 7:08 AM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: Tom de Vries; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] RE: libcilkrts breaks non-bootstrap build
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Iyer, Ba
Hello Everyone,
I am getting this weird bootstrap error in my SUSE machine with
libsanitizer that didn't occur ~1.5 days ago. Is anyone else seeing this?
libtool: compile: /export/users/gcc-svn/b-trunk-gcc/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/export/users/gcc-svn/b-trunk-gcc/./gcc -nostdinc++
On 5 November 2013 15:27, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> In file included from /usr/include/sys/vt.h:1:0,
> from
> ../../../../trunk-gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:49:
> /usr/include/linux/vt.h:74:15: error: expected unqualified-id before ânewâ
> u
On 5 November 2013 15:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 5 November 2013 15:27, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>> In file included from /usr/include/sys/vt.h:1:0,
>> from
>> ../../../../trunk-gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:49:
>> /usr/include/linux/vt.h:7
On 5 November 2013 15:38, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 5 November 2013 15:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 5 November 2013 15:27, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>>> In file included from /usr/include/sys/vt.h:1:0,
>>> from
>>> ../../../../trunk-gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_pl
On 11/05/13 03:35, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 11/04/2013 05:43 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
You might also be referring to Greg McGary's work on bounded
pointers, I don't
think that ever got integrated or if it did, it got pulled long ago.
It was integrated in
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:55:21AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/05/13 03:35, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >On 11/04/2013 05:43 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> >>On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >>>You might also be referring to Greg McGary's work on bounded
> >>>pointers, I don't
> >>>think tha
On 11/05/13 03:11, Yury Gribov wrote:
> If you're referring to mudflap (Frank Eigler's work),
> ...
> It never reached a point where interoperability across objects with
and without mudflap instrumentation worked
Jeff,
Could you add more details? E.g. I don't see how mudflap
interoperability
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:54:31AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/05/13 03:11, Yury Gribov wrote:
> > > If you're referring to mudflap (Frank Eigler's work),
> > > ...
> > > It never reached a point where interoperability across objects with
> >and without mudflap instrumentation worked
> >Could y
Yury Gribov writes:
>[...]
>> [mudflap] never reached a point where interoperability across objects with
> and without mudflap instrumentation worked
>
> Could you add more details? E.g. I don't see how mudflap
> interoperability is different from AdressSanitizer which seems to be
> state of the
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:58:30PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >> To make it easier to reproduce builds of software and entire GNU/Linux
> >> distributions, RMS had the idea of adding a warning to GCC that warns
> >> about the use of __DATE__ and _
Hi,
I’m trying to patch libgfortran’s Makefile.am but I’m running into trouble to
express some chain of dependencies.
I have two new files: a.F90 and b.F90. I’m adding them to
libgfortran_la_SOURCES. These will thus generate a.o and b.o object files,
which will be linked into libgfortran. So f
24 matches
Mail list logo
