On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, 07:36 sotrdg sotrdg via Gcc, wrote:
> last Daily bump was 5 days ago.
Yes, it's a known issue, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-August/236953.html
Need a fix on Daily bump
On 8/2/21 7:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
Hey.
Some time ago, someone added a git symbolic-ref for refs/heads/trunk
pointing to refs/heads/master.
Great you found out what caused that. We were aware of commits that didn't
pass gcc-verify check but for some reason went in.
A side effect of thi
On 8/3/21 9:33 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, 07:36 sotrdg sotrdg via Gcc, wrote:
last Daily bump was 5 days ago.
Thanks for heads up.
Yes, it's a known issue, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-August/236953.html
Need a fix on Daily bump
It's fixed n
On 8/3/21 9:33 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 8/2/21 7:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
Hey.
Some time ago, someone added a git symbolic-ref for refs/heads/trunk
pointing to refs/heads/master.
Great you found out what caused that. We were aware of commits that didn't
pass gcc-verify check but for s
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > >
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 15:41, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021
Hello, Gcc
We are a Mobile app development company. Would you be interested to develop
an App?
We can make any kind of app like:
. Taxi App
. Food App
. Fitness App
. Dating App
. Music App
. Travel App
. Games App
. Business
On 8/3/21 12:03 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 8/3/21 9:33 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 8/2/21 7:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
Hey.
Some time ago, someone added a git symbolic-ref for refs/heads/trunk
pointing to refs/heads/master.
Great you found out what caused that. We were aware of commits t
On Mon, 2 Aug 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> On 7/30/21 2:52 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Jul 2021, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > There's a new jump threader in GCC which is much more aggressive, and
> > > may trigger latent problems with other warning passes, especially
AIM:
- Transfer the vfunc handling code to region_model::get_fndecl_for_call ()
- Filter out a possible targets of a polymorphic call to only one most porbable
target
---
PROGRESS :
- I decided to transfer the code of detecting virtual call to
region_model::get_fndecl_for_call () so that the
On 8/3/21 9:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Mon, 2 Aug 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 7/30/21 2:52 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2021, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc wrote:
There's a new jump threader in GCC which is much more aggressive, and
may trigger latent problems with other warni
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 8/2/21 7:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> Hey.
>
> > Some time ago, someone added a git symbolic-ref for refs/heads/trunk
> > pointing to refs/heads/master.
>
> Great you found out what caused that. We were aware of commits that didn't
> pass gcc-verif
Hi all,
I recently committed support for the "-fnew-infallible" flag in Clang
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D105225) to improve non-exceptional performance for
code that contains exceptions. Having "new" terminate immediately on failure
stops upward exception propagation and leads to significantly
Joseph Myers, le mar. 03 août 2021 17:21:59 +, a ecrit:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Yes, we know about that one. What I'm asking for is the translation
> > units with the other warnings you showed with the latest GCC (including
> > the threader patches) on the othe
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wr
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 18:26, Modi Mo via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I recently committed support for the "-fnew-infallible" flag in Clang
> (https://reviews.llvm.org/D105225) to improve non-exceptional performance for
> code that contains exceptions. Having "new" terminate immediately on failure
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:20:49AM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> On 8/3/21 9:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >As discussed, this is a bug indicating that the code generating that
> >warning fails to check targetm.addr_space.zero_address_valid to determine
> >whether zero or small constant addre
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:20:49AM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> > On 8/3/21 9:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > >As discussed, this is a bug indicating that the code generating that
> > >warning fails to check targetm.addr_space.zero_address_val
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the
> second arg (__b),
> should be an immediate value.
Something that matches the "n" constraint, not necessarily a literal,
but stricter than just "imme
Off-topic...
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:00:20PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > But you do have a cfarm account :-)
>
> And build-many-glibcs.py is designed to be self-contained
[ snip ]
Yes, it's great :-)
> which will check out all the sources n
On 8/3/21, 1:51 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
>
>Could you explain this sentence in the commit message:
>"Note that the definition of global new is user-replaceable so users
>should ensure that the one used follows these semantics."
AFAICT based on the C++ standard, the user can replac
On 8/3/21 11:21 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
Yes, we know about that one. What I'm asking for is the translation
units with the other warnings you showed with the latest GCC (including
the threader patches) on the other targets (including i686 and pow
On 8/3/21 3:00 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:20:49AM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 8/3/21 9:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
As discussed, this is a bug indicating that the code generating that
warning fails to check targetm
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, 23:10 Modi Mo, wrote:
>
> On 8/3/21, 1:51 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
> >
> >Could you explain this sentence in the commit message:
> >"Note that the definition of global new is user-replaceable so users
> >should ensure that the one used follows these semantics."
Richard,
So, I’m noticing that in get_reassociation_width() we know how many ops
(ops_num) are in the expression being considered for parallel reassociation,
but this is not passed to the target hook. In my testing this seems like it
might be useful to have. If you determine the maximum width t
Hello,
I'm interested in learning about any forward edge control-flow integrity (CFI)
technologies in GCC. I was able to find information about the Virtual Table
Verification, Indirect Branch Tracking and Reuse Attack Protector technologies.
Are there any other technologies in GCC to protect in
On 8/3/21, 4:57 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, 23:10 Modi Mo, wrote:
> >
> > On 8/3/21, 1:51 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
> > >
> > >Could you explain this sentence in the commit message:
> > >"Note that the definition of global new is user-replaceable so users
> > >
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021, 02:15 Modi Mo, wrote:
> On 8/3/21, 4:57 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, 23:10 Modi Mo, wrote:
> > >
> > > On 8/3/21, 1:51 PM, "Jonathan Wakely" wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Could you explain this sentence in the commit message:
> > > >"Note that the d
28 matches
Mail list logo
