On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 03/10/2016 08:00 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:30 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 03/10/2016 01:18 PM, Ric
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 03/10/2016 08:00 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:30 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/10/2016 08:00 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:30
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/10/2016 08
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fr
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11,
On 08/03/16 19:11, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/08/2016 11:49 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 03/07/2016 02:49 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/07/2016 03:44 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
The RTL documentation for ASHIFT and friends says that the shift amount
must be:
"a fixed-point mode or be a constant wi
Hello GCC / libstdc++ folks,
I implemented C++17's is_always_lock_free [0] in clang / libc++
and am wondering if GCC and libstdc++ are interested in following
a similar API as the one I propose in the clang patch [1].
What I propose is:
* Extend the __GCC_ATOMIC_##TYPE##_LOCK_FREE macros to FL
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:45 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1
Hello,
I am rebooting a personal project to add support for the PowerPC A2
QPX (Quad Processing eXtension) vector unit to gcc. [1] I am
interested in: beginning the process to have my employer approve a
contributor assignment; advice on the best way to add in support for
QPX instructions and vecto
13 matches
Mail list logo