On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2016-02-04 19:16 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>> 2016-02-04 17:12 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
Hi,
I noticed that pic_offset_table_rtx is initialized twice in GCC. Take
x86_32 as an
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:54 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Richard Smith
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8,
2016-02-09 17:27 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> 2016-02-04 19:16 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>>> wrote:
2016-02-04 17:12 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
> Hi,
> I noticed that pic_offset_table_rtx is
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2016-02-09 17:27 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>>> 2016-02-04 19:16 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Ilya Enkovich
wrote:
> 2016-02-04 17:12 GMT+03:00 B
2016-02-09 18:13 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> I agree it looks inconsistent. But I don't think PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM is
>> supposed to return pseudo regno. Using EBX_REG value for this macro was a
>> workaround for problem of NULL pic_offse
On 09/02/16 14:56, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2016-02-09 17:27 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>>> 2016-02-04 19:16 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Ilya Enkovich
wrote:
> 2016-02-04 17:12 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
>>>
2016-02-09 18:45 GMT+03:00 Richard Earnshaw (lists) :
> On 09/02/16 14:56, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> I agree it looks inconsistent. But I don't think PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM is
>> supposed to return pseudo regno. Using EBX_REG value for this macro was a
>> workaround for problem of NULL pic_offs
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2016-02-09 18:45 GMT+03:00 Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> :
>> On 09/02/16 14:56, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree it looks inconsistent. But I don't think PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM is
>>> supposed to return pseudo regno. Using EBX_REG value
2016-02-09 19:00 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> 2016-02-09 18:45 GMT+03:00 Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>> :
>>> On 09/02/16 14:56, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
I agree it looks inconsistent. But I don't think PIC_OFFSET_TABLE_REGNUM
is
s
On 02/09/2016 07:27 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
2016-02-04 19:16 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
2016-02-04 17:12 GMT+03:00 Bin.Cheng :
Hi,
I noticed that pic_offset_table_rtx is initialized twice in G
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:45 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:54 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:51
Snapshot gcc-5-20160209 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20160209/
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
On 19/01/16 04:10, Jan Hubicka wrote:
In general, given that we have existing VRP implementation I would suggest
first implementing the IPA propagation and profile estimation bits using
existing VRP pass and then try to compare the simple dominator based approach
with the VRP we have and see wh
13 matches
Mail list logo