On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 04/22/2015 09:10 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Toon Moene wrote:
>
>
>>> Why is loop fusion important, especially in Fortran 90 and later programs
>>> ?
>>>
>>> Because without it, every array assignment is
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> Following up to my own email, I think I found the missing magic. I
> needed to set global_regs[16] to 1. Once global_regs was set for the
> register, the assignment stopped getting optimized out.
There is a helper in varasm.c (?) that does
I know that this maybe a silly question, but I have a question about
the assembly generated by your 3.2 compiler, it has to do with the
reasoning behind a certain instruction related with the loop
transformation:
All the details are here:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29780215/why-movl-1-edx
I repeated the toolchain build I did for RC-20150418, this time with
the 5.1 release.
The texinfo build dependency bug that I noticed in RC-20150418 appears
to be fixed, and the code generated for a small (<300 line) program
was identical to the code generated by RC-20150418 and RC-20150412.
I mad
There was one minor regression which I've fixed.
Tested on x86-64 Linux with the GCC and GDB testsuites.
Next on my plate is (finally) a full bootstrap now that GCC's
guality.exp, dwarf2.exp, and debug.exp are down to 1 regression versus
mainline. And finally... submitting the branch for revi
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, Tim Semeijn wrote:
> We have changed our company name, hostnames and contact information.
> Please remove the current BBLN mirror (mirror.bbln.org) and replace it
> with our three new ones:
The patch below implements those changes:
- Replace mirror.bbln.org by mirror1.babylo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Dear Gerald,
Thanks for processing the patch!
Best regards,
On 4/23/15 11:49 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, Tim Semeijn wrote:
>> We have changed our company name, hostnames and contact
>> information. Please remove the current B
On 04/18/2015 04:19 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:22:13 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
How to get 'volatile struct sv' GCC 'tree' type for:
volatile struct sv { volatile struct sv *p; };
I have found out how it can work, even with no change on the GCC side:
Instead of
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20150423 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20150423/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.8 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 03/18/2015 01:21 PM, Oleg Endo wrote:
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 22:31 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
I'm not a big fan of keeping the FOR_EACH_blah style iterator and would
prefer to use real C++ iterators. But it ought to give you some ideas
about how to start breaking these things out.
BTW I've tri
> > It converts with the attached patches, but there's still some problem
> > parsing the data:
> >
> > % ./create_gcov -binary loop -gcov_version 1 -gcov loop.gcda -gcov_version
> > 0x500e
> > % gcc50 -O2 -fprofile-use loop.c
> > loop.c:1:0: warning: '/home/andi/src/autofdo/loop.gcda' is version
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:06:46 +0200, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 04/18/2015 04:19 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > Instead of current:
> > plugin_build_record_type:
> > record_type = make_node (RECORD_TYPE)
> > plugin_build_add_field:
> > add fields to record_type... But there
12 matches
Mail list logo
