I am facing an issue compiling a gcc plugin. I am using the cudd
libraries (binary decision diagram libraries), Ubuntu version 14.04
and gcc version is 4.7.2. While running the Makefile, the compiler
fails to recognize the Cudd & BDD data structures whereas all the
necessary header files have been
I am facing an issue compiling a gcc plugin. I am using the cudd
libraries (binary decision diagram libraries) and my gcc version is
4.7.2. While running the Makefile, the compiler fails to recognize the
Cudd & BDD data structures whereas all the necessary header files have
been included and the li
Hello.
I've just noticed that we, for default configuration, produce just 30
partitions.
I'm wondering whether that's fine, or it would be necessary to re-tune
partitioning
algorithm to produce better balanced map?
Attached patch is used to produce following dump:
Partition sizes:
partition 0
Hi all,
I'm working on enabling target attributes and pragmas on aarch64 and I'm stuck
on a particular issue.
I want to be able to use a target pragma to enable SIMD support in a SIMD
intrinsics header file.
So it will look like this:
$ cat simd_header.h
#pragma GCC push_options
#pragma GCC ta
I'm not very familiar with the optimizations that are done in O2 vs O1,
or even what happens in these optimizations.
So, I'm wondering if this is a bug, or a subtle valid optimization that
I don't understand. Any help would be appreciated.
Another approach to debugging a suspected optimization
On 5/19/2015 10:09 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm not very familiar with the optimizations that are done in O2 vs O1,
or even what happens in these optimizations.
So, I'm wondering if this is a bug, or a subtle valid optimization that
I don't understand. Any help would be appreciated.
Another
On 19/05/15 15:55, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Kiril,
This is funny, I've updated bz65837 today in the same direction.
On 05/19/2015 04:17 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
I'm working on enabling target attributes and pragmas on aarch64 and I'm stuck
on a particular issue.
I want to be able
On 05/18/2015 08:13 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
2015-05-06 17:18 GMT+03:00 Ilya Enkovich :
2015-04-25 4:32 GMT+03:00 Jan Hubicka :
Hi,
I am adding Vladimir and Richard into CC. I tried to solve similar problem
with FP math years ago by having -mfpmath=sse,i387. The idea was to allow
use of i387 re
On 05/19/2015 04:14 PM, mark maule wrote:
> Thanks again Martin. I started going down that road yesterday, and got
> lost in the forest of options. What I was looking for was some option
> that would tell me what was being done with dgHandle specifically. I
> played around with -fopt-info-al
On 5/19/2015 10:28 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/19/2015 04:14 PM, mark maule wrote:
Thanks again Martin. I started going down that road yesterday, and got
lost in the forest of options. What I was looking for was some option
that would tell me what was being done with dgHandle specifically
On 19/05/15 16:21, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 19/05/15 15:55, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Kiril,
This is funny, I've updated bz65837 today in the same direction.
On 05/19/2015 04:17 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
I'm working on enabling target attributes and pragmas on aarch64 and I'm stuck
Snapshot gcc-5-20150519 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20150519/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
Hello!
Following up on last year's discussion (https://lwn.net/Articles/586838/,
https://lwn.net/Articles/588300/), I believe that we have a solution. If
I am wrong, I am sure you all will let me know, and in great detail. ;-)
The key simplification is to "just say no" to RCU-protected array in
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
>
> http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/consume.2015.05.18a.pdf
>From a very quick read-through, the restricted dependency chain in 7.9
seems to be reasonable, and essentially covers "thats' what hardware
gives us anyway", making
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> - the "you can add/subtract integral values" still opens you up to
> language lawyers claiming "(char *)ptr - (intptr_t)ptr" preserving the
> dependency, which it clearly doesn't. But language-lawyering it does,
> since all those operatio
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 06:57:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> >
> > http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/consume.2015.05.18a.pdf
>
> >From a very quick read-through, the restricted dependency chain in 7.9
> seems to be rea
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:10:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > - the "you can add/subtract integral values" still opens you up to
> > language lawyers claiming "(char *)ptr - (intptr_t)ptr" preserving the
> > dependency, which it
17 matches
Mail list logo
