Re: how to check if target supports andnot instruction ?

2016-10-17 Thread Richard Biener
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 13 October 2016 at 13:22, Marc Glisse wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > > > >> On 12 October 2016 at 14:43, Richard Biener wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > >>> > On Wed, 12 Oct 2016,

Re: Question about sibling call epilogues & registers

2016-10-17 Thread Daniel Santos
It would probably be useful to post the actual code. The below function emit_msabi_outlined_restore() is is called from ix86_expand_epilogue() to emit the RTL to call the restore stub. Like ix86_expand_epilogue, it uses style == 0 to indicate that there will be a sibling call following the epil

Re: how to check if target supports andnot instruction ?

2016-10-17 Thread Prathamesh Kulkarni
On 17 October 2016 at 13:52, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sat, 15 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> On 13 October 2016 at 13:22, Marc Glisse wrote: >> > On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> > >> >> On 12 October 2016 at 14:43, Richard Biener wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, 12 Oc

Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing (was: basic_block flags, BB_VISITED)

2016-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:06:59 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > > On 10/14/16 05:28, Richard Biener wrote: > > > >> The BB_VISITED flag has indetermined state at the beginning of a pass. > >> You have to ensure it is cleared yourself. > >

Re: Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing (was: basic_block flags, BB_VISITED)

2016-10-17 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:06:59 +0200, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: >> > On 10/14/16 05:28, Richard Biener wrote: >> > >> >> The BB_VISITED flag has indetermined state at the beg

Re: Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing

2016-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:22:17 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:06:59 +0200, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > >> > On 10/14/16 05:28, Richard Biener wr

Re: Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing

2016-10-17 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:22:17 +0200, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge >> wrote: >> > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:06:59 +0200, Richard Biener >> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:00 P

Re: Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing

2016-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:08:44 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:22:17 +0200, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge > >> wrote: > >> > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:06:59 +

Re: Make GCC emit ASM instructions in 'gcc/except.c' for i686 MinGW targets ?

2016-10-17 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/16/2016 08:58 PM, lhmouse wrote: Hi there, I come up with an idea about implementing stack unwinding for the i686-w64-mingw32 target using native Windows Structured Exception Handling (a.k.a SEH) for efficiency reasons. Unlike DWARF and SEH for x64, SEH for x86 is stack-based and works li

Re: Re: Make GCC emit ASM instructions in 'gcc/except.c' for i686 MinGW targets ?

2016-10-17 Thread lhmouse
> I'd probably create a new exception handling model and conditionalize > whatever code you need based on that. That would require copy-n-paste of tons of code... All this remains contingent on Microsoft's generosity because they don't provide APIs for SEH on x86, unlike on x64. So I have to reu

Re: Explicitly list all tree codes in gcc/tree-streamer.c:record_common_node

2016-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:47:56 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:25:01 +0200, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge > >> wrote: > >> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0

Re: [PR lto/77458] Avoid ICE in offloading with differing _FloatN, _FloatNx types

2016-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! Ping. On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:18:00 +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:25:01 +0200, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge > > wrote: > > > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener > > > wrote: > > >> On Fri, Sep 16, 20

Re: [RFC] Reliable compiler specification setting (at least include/lib dirs) through the process environment

2016-10-17 Thread Joseph Myers
On Sun, 16 Oct 2016, Shea Levy wrote: > options) and clearly have the semantics we want. Ideally we would be > able to specify something on the level of abstraction of "this directory > should be treated like you would normally treat /usr" and get > e.g. /include, /lib, frameworks on OS X, etc. ha

Re: Who played with the GCC Bugzilla git repo?

2016-10-17 Thread Frank Ch. Eigler
Frédéric Buclin writes: > Someone played with the GCC Bugzilla git repo last week with no real reason: > Author: root > Date: Fri Oct 7 15:28:43 2016 + > snap-data > [...] That was little old me, with the reason being to conserve local changes with version control. > Looks like the g

[SOLVED-ish] Question about sibling call epilogues & registers

2016-10-17 Thread Daniel Santos
So the core problem was my "restore multiple" insn contained a CALL insn and was a call_insn. The symbol it called is in the static section of libgcc. However, during peephole2 pass, get_call_reg_set_usage in final.c didn't find a function declaration attached to the symbol and so defaulted to