Re: Could vector type of poly_int and compile-time constants be enabled at the same time ?

Hi, Okay & got it, Thanks for detail :) Jojo R 在 2021年4月29日 +0800 PM5:11，Richard Sandiford ，写道： > JojoR via Gcc writes: > > Hi, > > > > I have a little know about for 'Sizes and offsets as runtime invariants’, > > > > and need to add vector types like V2SImode as compile-time constants >

Re: Could vector type of poly_int and compile-time constants be enabled at the same time ?

Hi, Okay & thanks. Jojo R 在 2021年4月29日 +0800 PM6:28，Richard Biener ，写道： > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:40 AM JojoR via Gcc wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I have a little know about for 'Sizes and offsets as runtime invariants’, > > > > and need to add vector types like V2SImode as compile-time

GCC 9.4 Status Report (2021-04-21)

Status == It's time for the GCC 9.4 release, I therefore plan to do a GCC 9.4 release candidate on May 19th and the release about a week after that if no unforseen problems arise. We have one P1 regression, PR98032 which is a C++ frontend issue. Please make sure to backport regression fixes

Re: [RFC] A memory gathering optimization for loop

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 9:51 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > > * Feng Xue: > > > To simplify explanation of this memory gathering optimization, pseudo > > code on original nested loops is given as: > > > > outer-loop ( ) { /* data in inner loop are also invariant in outer loop. > > */ > >

Re: [RFC] A memory gathering optimization for loop

* Richard Biener: >> Can you change this optimization so that it can use a fixed-size buffer? >> This would avoid all issues around calling calloc. If iter_count can be >> very large, allocating that much extra memory might not be beneficial >> anyway. > > It would need to be TLS storage though o

JMP Users Info

Good Day, I was wondering if you would be interested in our recently verified Statistical Analysis Software Users? Following are the software users we have: JMP, RStudio, IHS Markit, IBM SPSS Statistics, SAS Enterprise Miner and more. I look forward for your response. Regards,

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

Is the format produced by create_gcov and expected by GCC under -fauto-rpofile documented somewhere? How is it different from .gcda used in FDO, e.g., as described here: http://src.gnu-darwin.org/src/contrib/gcc/gcov-io.h.html? My input data is different from perf.data and I'd like to write a too

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

172060...@hdu.edu.cn writes: > Hi all, > > I`m using GCC 9.3 AutoFDO and the old version create_gcov on arm64 > and it works well. Actually it support not only LBR like mode but > also inst_retired even cycles event, which`s the early implementation > of AutoFDO[1]. There is no difference in o

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc writes: > Is the format produced by create_gcov and expected by GCC under > -fauto-rpofile documented somewhere? How is it different from .gcda > used in FDO, e.g., as described here: > http://src.gnu-darwin.org/src/contrib/gcc/gcov-io.h.html? I believe it's very similar

Re: RFC: attributes for marking security boundaries (system calls/ioctls, user vs kernel pointers etc)

David Malcolm via Gcc writes: > I think I want a way for the user to be able to mark security > boundaries in their code: for example: > * in the Linux kernel the boundary between untrusted user-space data > and kernel data, or, > * for a user-space daemon, the boundary between data coming from t

gcc-10-20210430 is now available

Snapshot gcc-10-20210430 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20210430/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch