Re: please document requirements on sphinx

On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 11:49 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Both gccjit and gnat now use sphinx to build the documentation. While not a > direct part of the build process, it would be nice to document the > requirements > on sphinx, and agree on a common version used to generate that documentation

Re: SPIR-V and GCC

On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 16:20 +, BogDan wrote: > On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 5:22 PM, David Malcolm > wrote: > On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 14:36 +, BogDan wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > > > Probably is a little bit too early, but I'd like to ask if

[PATCH, committed] jit documentation fixes

On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 07:37 +0100, Bert Wesarg wrote: > Hi David, > > while reading the very good tutorial at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/jit/intro/tutorial03.html > > I noticed that the calls to gcc_jit_block_end_with_conditional() > misses the on_true and on

Re: SPIR-V and GCC

On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 12:27 +0100, Xerxes Rånby wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 16:20 +, BogDan wrote: > > > On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 5:22 PM, David Malcolm > > > wrote: > > > On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 14:36 +, BogDan wrote: > > > > Hello

inline asm clobbers

Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers: asm ("" : : "r" (var) : "0"); // i386: clobbers eax How is this better than using register names? This makes even less sense when you realize that (apparently) the indices of registers aren't fixed. Which means there is no way to kn

Re: inline asm clobbers

On 3/11/2015 4:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd wrote: Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers: asm ("" : : "r" (var) : "0"); // i386: clobbers eax How is this better than using register name

Re: inline asm clobbers

On 3/11/2015 4:41 PM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: On Mar 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:58 PM, David Wohlferd wrote: Why does gcc allow you to specify clobbers using numbers: asm ("" : : "r" (var) : "0"); // i

Re: inline asm clobbers

Resending due to bounced email. On 3/11/2015 6:19 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM, David Wohlferd wrote: The reason I believe the order can change is this comment from i386.h: /* Order in which to allocate registers. Each register must be listed once, even

Re: inline asm clobbers

On 3/12/2015 7:24 AM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: On Mar 11, 2015, at 8:53 PM, David Wohlferd wrote: ... I would agree that one should avoid it. I'd be wary of removing it from GCC at this point since it might break working code. It certainly would. It’s not all that common, but I

[PATCH] jit docs: Add "Packaging notes" section

On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 11:09 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 11:49 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > > Both gccjit and gnat now use sphinx to build the documentation. While not a > > direct part of the build process, it would be nice to document the > > requi

Re: Re: Why not implementation of interrupt attribute on IA32/x86-64

ugly in gcc. Greetings David F. On 13/03/15 14:08, Andi Kleen wrote: Didier Garcin writes: many OS hobbyist developpers would be pleased GCC implements the interrupt or interrupt_handler attribute for Intel architecture. Would it be so difficult to implement for this architecture ? There are

Named parameters

ecifying all earlier arguments. At the moment, I am not asking for an implementation, or even /how/ it might be implemented (perhaps a MELT plugin?) - I would merely like opinions on whether it would be a useful and practical enhancement. David

Re: Named parameters

On 16/03/15 17:34, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, David Brown wrote: > >> In a discussion on comp.lang.c, the subject of "named parameters" (or >> "designated parameters") has come up again. This is a feature that some >> of us feel would b

gcc wiki project

Hello, I was just reading through the current projects wiki page and I noticed how out of date pretty much all of them are. So I was planning on doing "spring cleaning" by going down the list tracking down what has been and what needs to be down and updating all the wikis. Do you think this is so

C++ exception handling optimization performance

Hello all, With gcc, does the fact that some branch results in a C++ exception effect the performance of a function when that exception branch isn't entered? In other words, does the presence of a throw effect the optimizer in any way? -- David Sankel -- David Sankel Stellar Scienc

ANN: gcc-python-plugin 0.14

gcc-python-plugin is a plugin for GCC 4.6 onwards which embeds the CPython interpreter within GCC, allowing you to write new compiler warnings in Python, generate code visualizations, etc. It ships with "gcc-with-cpychecker", which implements static analysis passes for GCC aimed at finding bugs in

Re: Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach!

I would expect the compiler to optimize to > something like this: > > char *x = z; Why? What if y has a potential side-effect (say it makes a function call)? David

Re: Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach!

Paul E. McKenney wrote: > I was thinking of "y" as a simple variable, but if it is something more > complex, then the compiler could do this, right? > > char *x; > > y; > x = z; Yeah. I presume it has to maintain the ordering, though. David

Re: Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach!

Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Ah, I was assuming between x and z. David, what was your intent? ;-) Clarification. David

Re: Better info for combine results in worse code generated

seems like a problem with the cost model. Rc instructions are more expensive and should be represented as such in rtx_costs. - David

Re: Better info for combine results in worse code generated

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:47:53AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: >> This seems like a problem with the cost model. Rc instructions are >> more expensive and should be represented as such in rtx_costs. > > The record i

Re: [RFC] Kernel livepatching support in GCC

gt; Comments? > Rather than just a sequence of NOP's, should the first NOP be a unconditional branch to the beginning of the real function? I don't know if this applies to AArch64 cpus, but I believe some cpus can handle such branches already in the decode unit, thus avoiding any extra cycles for skipping the NOPs. David

OpenRISC port accepted for inclusion in GCC

coordinated with the GCC Release Managers. Please join me in congratulating Stafford on his new role. Please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file. Happy hacking! David

A possible gcc bug?

s from the compiler evaluations in the "test_" functions shows that it this happens in the compiler analysis - it is not a code generation issue. <https://godbolt.org> is great for this kind of testing! Is there something going wrong in gcc here, or is there something I am missing? mvh., David

Passing empty "tag" structs

two parameters take up valuable register (or stack) slots for no useful information. Could this function be mangled to be, in effect: foo__tag1_t__tag2_t(int x); That would let you use tags for a variety of safe programming techniques with absolutely zero overhead. mvh., David

Re: A possible gcc bug?

On 07/09/2018 09:47, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 08:57:25AM +0200, David Brown wrote: I am always wary of saying there might be a compiler bug - usually it is a bug in the user code. But this time I am very suspicious. The example here comes from a discussion in the

Re: Passing empty "tag" structs

On 07/09/2018 10:10, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 at 08:06, David Brown wrote: In C++ programming, it is sometimes helpful to have empty structs acting as tags. An example is "struct nothrow_t {}". When parameters of these types - such as "nothrow", are

Re: warning: conversion from ‘int’ to ‘char’ may change value

On 17/09/18 14:00, Umesh Kalappa wrote: > Hi All, > > When we try to compile the below case from trunk gcc we get the below > warning (-Wconversion) i.e > > void start(void) { > char n = 1; > char n1 = 0x01; > n &= ~n1; > } > > $xgcc -S warn.c -nostdinc -Wconversion > warning: conversion f

Thomas Schwinge appointed OpenACC Maintainer

I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed Thomas Schwinge as OpenACC Maintainer. Please join me in congratulating Thomas on his new role. Thomas, please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file. Happy hacking! David

Broken mirror site

At this time, your Canadian mirror site at http://gcc.parentingamerica.com/ is broken. There is only a page with the text "It works!"... which appears to be untrue. Take care, David

FW: PROPOSAL: Extend inline asm syntax with size spec

u add a 'size' attribute to the 'always inlined' foo() above > rather than trying to add one to the asm() statement itself. > Then add a warning in the documentation that small size attributes > might make the assembly fail due to limited branch offsets (etc). > >

Re: Power 64 ELFv2 w.r.t toc(cmodel=medium) on windows.

syntax. AIX uses the AIX file format and assembler syntax. Windows uses PE file format and syntax, which is not supported in the rs6000 or powerpcspe ports. Are you asking about semantics or syntax? Which source code do you not want to change? If you want to target PE assembler, GCC needs to be taught about that syntax, or at least it needs to generate the ELF syntax for Windows PE. Thanks, David

Re: Power 64 ELFv2 w.r.t toc(cmodel=medium) on windows.

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:27 AM Umesh Kalappa wrote: > > Thank you David for the information. > >>Are you asking about semantics or syntax? Which source code do you > not want to change? > My bad was not clear in the first go and the questions was why on PE >

Re: Help Out with Gcc

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 10:04 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 05:59, nick wrote: > > > > Greetings All, > > > > I assume you get lots of these but I was wondering what's the > > areas where gcc needs help the most these days that are good > > for a new developer to gcc. > >

Re: [PATCH] Add missing noexpect causes in tuple for move functions

ght is it per patch or just one time. > > My other question is related to the noexcept parts and that either I or > you should move and CC the other involed list i.e. the llibstdc++ list. You can submit one copyright assignment per patch ... if you're a masochist. The recommended approach is a single "Futures" copyright assignment for all current and future patches. Thanks, David

Re: Regarding projects and begineer guide.

On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 22:48 +0530, Durgesh Kumar wrote: > Dear sir/mam > I am durgesh kumar from ABES engineering collenge,ghaziabad,uttar > pradesh,india. > > I am currently in 2nd year of my graduation(Btech CSE ) > > I want to contribute in some of your prestigious project. So i > request you

Re: Optimization Option Question

On 19/12/18 09:10, Tangnianyao (ICT) wrote: > Greetings All, > I am dealing with compile optimization comparison between arm64 and intel > platform, with g++ (version 4.9.4). > > Compile the following c++ code, > > uint32 Witness::getEntityVolatileDataUpdateFlags(Entity* otherEntity) > { >

Re: improve syntax errors

On Thu, 2019-01-03 at 15:59 +0100, Daniel Marjamäki wrote: > Hello! > > I have used GCC for decades and would like to contribute a little. :- > ) Hi, and welcome! > I would like to see if I can improve the syntax errors. > > Here is one example code: > > int x = 3) + 0; > > I have created

Re: autovectorization in gcc

sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: couldn't vectorize loop /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: not vectorized: control flow in loop. /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: missed: statement clobbers memory: __builtin_sqrtf (_1); and with -fopt-info-v

Re: autovectorization in gcc

On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 11:10 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 09:56 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 09:50, Andrew Haley wrote: > > > I don't agree. Sometimes vectorization is critical. It would be > > > nice > > &

Re: Replacing DejaGNU

icate* error messages. > I remember briefly discussing this with Dodji in Manchester. > > Just wanted to make sure this kind of public discussion isn't completely > suppressed. A few years ago, Rob Savoye mentioned that he had a plan for a replacement. - David

ANN: gcc-python-plugin 0.17

gcc-python-plugin is a plugin for GCC 4.6 onwards which embeds the CPython interpreter within GCC, allowing you to write new compiler warnings in Python, generate code visualizations, etc. This release adds support for gcc 9 (along with continued support for gcc 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 5, 6, 7, and 8)

Re: -fno-common

On 28/01/2019 16:58, Bernhard Schommer wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to know if the handling of the option -fno-common has > changed between version 7.3 and 8.2 for x86. I tried it with the > default system version of OpenSUSE and for example: > > const int i; > > is placed in the .bss section.

Re: -fno-common

any kind of "common" at all - or at the very least, make "-fno-common" the default. <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85678> (That is just my opinion, of course.) mvh., David On 29/01/2019 11:09, Bernhard Schommer wrote: Thanks for the fast answer, sor

Andrew Stubbs and Julian Brown appointed AMD GCN maintainers

hacking! David

Contributing p0355 to libstdc++-v3

Hello GCC, My name is David Brown and I am interested in contributing to libstdc++-v3. Specifically, I would like to begin implementing https://wg21.link/p0355r7 having used its reference implementation in several projects already. I am aware that I will need to fill out some FSF forms for legal

Re: AVR __progmem__ variable reading

On 22/02/2019 23:34, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Hi I am using for a while now gcc and especially __progmem__ attribute. I’d like to report a feature request for gcc to handle reading from flash memory variables. Compiler has all the knowledge (target device, availability of LPM, ELPM instructions e

Re: AVR __progmem__ variable reading

On 23/02/2019 19:38, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown w dniu 23.02.2019, o godz. 16:34: On 22/02/2019 23:34, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Hi I am using for a while now gcc and especially __progmem__ attribute. I’d like to report a feature request for gcc to handle

Re: AVR __progmem__ variable reading

On 24/02/2019 14:47, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown <mailto:david.br...@hesbynett.no>> w dniu 24.02.2019, o godz. 12:13: This sort of thing has been an issue for all sorts of small microcontrollers, and all their compilers, since their inception.  I

Re: AVR __progmem__ variable reading

On 24/02/2019 18:29, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown w dniu 24.02.2019, o godz. 14:58: On 24/02/2019 14:47, Łukasz Kostka wrote: Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown mailto:david.br...@hesbynett.no>> w dniu 24.02.2019, o godz. 12:13: This sort of thi

Re: AVR __progmem__ variable reading

On 25/02/2019 18:09, Łukasz Kostka wrote: > > >> Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown w dniu >> 25.02.2019, o godz. 08:43: >> >> >> On 24/02/2019 18:29, Łukasz Kostka wrote: >>>> Wiadomość napisana przez David Brown w dniu >>>> 24.

Re: Kitware, Inc. - Assignment for all future changes

Sent offline to Adrien. - David On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 10:14 AM Adrien Beaudet wrote: > Hello, > > A Kitware employee, Ben Boeckel, would like to contribute a patch of > approximately 100 lines. There is also potential for Kitware employees to > contribute more code in the fu

Re: About BZ#87210 [RFE] To initialize automatic stack variables

On 19/02/2019 11:23, P J P wrote: Hello,   -> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210 This RFE is about providing gcc option(s) to eliminate information leakage issues from programs. Information leakage via uninitialised memory has beena chronic/recurring issue across all software.

Re: About BZ#87210 [RFE] To initialize automatic stack variables

On 05/03/2019 19:37, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Hi! On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 09:45:37PM +0100, David Brown wrote: Forcing "stolen_key" to be zero initialised does not help anyone - options for that just make code slower and hide errors that would occur with other compiler opt

Re: About BZ#87210 [RFE] To initialize automatic stack variables

On 06/03/2019 02:50, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 09:36:56PM +0100, David Brown wrote: >> On 05/03/2019 19:37, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 09:45:37PM +0100, David Brown wrote: >>>> void foo(void) { >>>>

GCC 9 Usability Improvements blog post

I've written up my GCC 9 work in blog form here: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/03/08/usability-improvements-in-gcc-9/ I'm working on a patch for changes.html, to cover the same material. (sorry about the shameless self-promotion) Dave

Re: Warning for C Parameter Name Mismatch

On 09/03/2019 00:06, Joseph Myers wrote: On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Joel Sherrill wrote: Can gcc report when the parameter name in a C prototype does not match that used in the implementation? int f(int x); int f(int y) {...} I think this would be normal and expected - an installed header would us

Re: Warning for C Parameter Name Mismatch

On 09/03/2019 03:23, Eric Gallager wrote: On 3/8/19, David Brown wrote: On 09/03/2019 00:06, Joseph Myers wrote: On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Joel Sherrill wrote: Can gcc report when the parameter name in a C prototype does not match that used in the implementation? int f(int x); int f(int y

Re: Warning for C Parameter Name Mismatch

On 10/03/2019 07:11, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: (I am reading the GCC mailing list in digest mode) On 3/9/19 10:58 PM, gcc-digest-h...@gcc.gnu.org wrote: On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Joel Sherrill wrote: Can gcc report when the parameter name in a C prototype does not match that used in the implem

Re: GCC turns &~ into | due to undefined bit-shift without warning

On 11/03/2019 12:24, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2019-03-11 11:06:37 +, Moritz Strübe wrote: >> On 11.03.2019 at 10:14 Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> The fact that negative or >= bit precision shifts are UB is widely known, > [...] > > And even in the case where the compiler maps the shift directly

Re: How to add %' into gfc_fatal_error

On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 15:18 +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > I would like to add %' into __gcc_gfc__ in order to handle: > > ./xgcc -B. /tmp/module.ii -Wformat -c > /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/fortran/module.c: In function ‘void > dump_module(const char*, int)’: > /home/marxin/Programmin

Re: GCC turns &~ into | due to undefined bit-shift without warning

On 12/03/2019 16:40, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2019-03-11 13:51:21 +0100, David Brown wrote: On 11/03/2019 12:24, Vincent Lefevre wrote: It already does by default: -Wshift-count-negative Warn if shift count is negative. This warning is enabled by default

Re: GCC turns &~ into | due to undefined bit-shift without warning

On 13/03/2019 03:25, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2019-03-12 21:56:59 +0100, David Brown wrote: >> I disagree. To generate an unconditional error (rejecting the program), the >> compiler would need such proof - such as by tracing execution from main(). >> But to generat

Re: [RFC] split of i386.c

On Tue, 2019-03-12 at 16:08 +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > I've thinking about the file split about quite some time, mainly > in context of PR84402. I would like to discuss if it's fine for > maintainers of the target to make such split and into which logical > components can the file be spl

Re: GCC turns &~ into | due to undefined bit-shift without warning

On 22/03/2019 11:20, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > On Freitag, 22. März 2019 11:02:39 CET Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 3/21/19 10:19 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: >>> From having fixed UBSAN warnings, I have seen many cases where undefined >>> behavior was performed, but where the code was aware o

Re: GSOC

On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 19:51 -0400, nick wrote: > Greetings All, > > I would like to take up parallelize compilation using threads or make > c++/c > memory issues not automatically promote. I did ask about this before > but > not get a reply. When someone replies I'm just a little concerned as >

Re: programming language that does not inhibit further optimization by gcc

On 30/03/2019 08:13, Albert Abramson wrote: Now I'm on a totally unrelated project, writing code in C, but still using the GCC compiler under the hood. The previous developers used raw pointers quite a bit. However, as I expand the code, I'd like to use some of the features in C++, but Atmel St

Re: Show name of compiler options when linking

On Thu, 2019-04-04 at 10:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 11:10, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 10:56, Peter Olsson wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I often want to link to specific compiler options in your online > > > docs > > > but the proble

Re: GCC 8: adding, thru a plugin, an analyzing RTL pass after pro_and_epilogue issue with its reference_pass_name

On Wed, 2019-04-10 at 17:53 +0200, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > Hello All, > > This is work done for the CHARIOT H2020 project (see > https://www.chariotproject.eu/ for more context) in relation with my > BISMON project (see http://github.com/bstarynk/bismon/ for more, and, > if > you want mor

Google Season of Docs: GIMPLE Documentation request for mentors

for Fall, after GSoC, but the deadline to nominate a project is soon. Is anyone with GIMPLE knowedge and experience willing to volunteer to mentor a documentation writer so that we can improve the GCC documentation and make it easier for developers to participate in GCC? Thanks, David

Iain Sandoe appointed Darwin co-maintainer

I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed Iain Sandoe as Darwin co-maintainer. Please join me in congratulating Iain on his new role. Iain, please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file. Happy hacking! David

Roman Zhuykov appointed Modulo Scheduler maintainer

I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has appointed Roman Zhuykov as Modulo Scheduler maintainer. Please join me in congratulating Roman on his new role. Roman, please update your listing in the MAINTAINERS file. Happy hacking! David

copyright assignment form

Dear GCC devs, in accordance with [1] I'd like to ask you to provide me with the copyright assignment form (the "for all future changes" variant). I'll be submitting a larger patch soon. Regards David Čepelík [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal

Re: gcc: -ftest-coverage and -auxbase

path/name.c > > into > > bin/some-product/some/path/name.o, > > I could simply say > > -auxbase $(@:%.o=%) > > The problem is that in common.opt, auxbase is marked RejectDriver. > > It looks like removing it would some my problem. Anyone have a reason > why removing that would be a bad idea? Or have a different solution? > > Thanks. > > David

Re: Dropping support of repo files (tlink)

ure? Is it even > used? AIX currently does not support GCC LTO, but the hope was that GCC would not do anything to specifically inhibit that ability to eventually support that feature. AIX currently needs collect2. I guess that AIX could try to find another mechanism when it adds support. Thanks, David

Re: [testsuite] What's the expected behaviour of dg-require-effective-target shared?

rror. > > if the intent is to check that the target supports linking a shared lib with > undefined external symbols, then perhaps we need a different test for the > “just supports shared libs” Thanks, David

Re: Renaming vec_step in tree-vect-loop.c (to fix build on powerpc/clang)

vec PEM/PIM. Clang is not using a namespace reserved to the compiler by defining vec_step. The PowerPC maintainers in the Clang community are not willing to rectify this? Thanks, David

Re: Rust front-end

On Fri, 2019-08-23 at 11:10 -0300, Mateus Carmo Martins de Freitas Barbosa wrote: > I'm interested in working on the Rust front-end for GCC. > > So far I've cloned the repository git> > and tried to compile it as described in tF

Re: GCC wwwdocs move to git done

On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 09:37 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 01:25:30PM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote: > > Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 01:28, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > > I've done the move of GCC wwwdocs to git (using the previously > > > > posted a

Re: GCC wwwdocs move to git done

On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 15:06 +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 8 Oct 2019, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > > Hi - > > > > Thanks - good job with moving this to git! +1 > > > Note 1: someone with the right access needs to create the > > > symlink > > > /sourceware/git/gcc-wwwdocs.git -> > > > /s

Re: GCC selftest improvements

On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 20:50 +, Andrew Dean via gcc wrote: > TLDR: I'd like to propose adding a dependency on a modern unit > testing framework to make it easier to write unit tests within GCC. > Before I spend much more time on it, what sort of buy-in should I > get? Are there any people in par

GCC's instrumentation and the target environment

I wish to use GCC based instrumentation on an embedded target. And I am finding that GCC's libgcov.a is not well suited to my needs. Ideally, all the application entry points and everthing that knows about the internals of the implementation would be in separate files from everything that does i/

Re: Commit messages and the move to git

On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 11:27 +, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:07 AM Jonathan Wakely < > jwakely@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 17:42, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:19:25PM +000

Re: GCC's instrumentation and the target environment

expected standard libc function. If the embedded (standalone) build was in effect, then there would be extern declarations for each of the above, but *NO* definition -- the definition would be the reposibility of the application. Comments? David

GCC static analysis branch now available on Compiler Explorer

For the adventurous/curious, my static analyzer branch of GCC [1] is now available on Compiler Explorer (aka godbolt.org) so you can try it out without building it yourself. [Thanks to Matt Godbolt, Patrick Quist and others at the Compiler Explorer project] On https://godbolt.org/ within the C an

Re: GCC static analysis branch now available on Compiler Explorer

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 11:04 -0500, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 10:46:59AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: [...] > > Would it make sense to add an "analyzer" component to our bugzilla, > > even though this is still on a branch? (with me as default > >

Re: GCC static analysis branch now available on Compiler Explorer

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 12:11 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 11:04 -0500, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 10:46:59AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > [...] > > > Would it make sense to add an "analyzer" component to our > >

Re: GCC static analysis branch now available on Compiler Explorer

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 09:36 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 12/10/19 8:46 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > > For the adventurous/curious, my static analyzer branch of GCC [1] > > is > > now available on Compiler Explorer (aka godbolt.org) so you can try > > it > >

Re: GCC static analysis branch now available on Compiler Explorer

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 13:42 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 12:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 12/10/19 10:56 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 09:36 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > > On 12/10/19 8:46 AM, David Malcolm wrote:

Re: Usage of C11 Annex K Bounds-checking interfaces on GCC

On 15/12/2019 02:57, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 12:36 PM Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/9/19 8:15 PM, li zi wrote: Hi All, We are using gcc in our projects and we found some of the C standard functions (like memcpy, strcpy) used in gcc may induce security vulnerablities like b

Re: Option flag with string arguments

On Thu, 2019-12-19 at 16:47 -0500, Erick Ochoa wrote: > Hello, > > I am working on testing an optimization. I am starting to write > tests in the GCC testing suite. However, I want to develop some > fine grain testing for my own sake. > > This optimization I am working on, is a variant of struct

Re: Does gcc automatically lower optimization level for very large routines?

e estimated memory usage again, recursing until it can apply the optimization within the memory limit or the optimization would not be effective. IBM XL Compiler does not try to recover from an out of memory error, but it explicitly considers memory use of optimization passes. It does not adjust the complexity of the optimization, but it does adjust the size of the region or other parameters to reduce the memory usage of the data structures for an optimization. Thanks, David

What's the plan for git-only branches?

(Sorry if I'm missing a FAQ here, but the discussion about the git conversion has grown very large) I'm wondering what the plan is for the git-only branches currently hosted on the gcc.gnu.org git server. In particular, I'm actively developing stuff in my "dmalcolm/analyzer" branch there, and I'v

Re: Mechanism to get at function information seems not to work

On Fri, 2020-01-03 at 23:02 +, Gary Oblock wrote: > I'm having some grief attempting to get at the local definitions > in LTO (more about the options used later.) > > Here's the sequence of code in my optimization (part of attempt > at structure reorganization optimizations.) > > cgraph_nod

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

o be able to check for MISRA compliance and get the warnings. So a project to make such warnings in gcc would be a very nice idea. mvh., David

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

On 09/01/17 15:15, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 01/09/2017 08:58 AM, David Brown wrote: > >> I don't know about CERT-C, but one of the challenges of implementing >> MISRA coding standards checking in gcc is that the MISRA documents are >> not free. They are cheap (a

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

On 09/01/17 19:43, paul.kon...@dell.com wrote: On Jan 9, 2017, at 1:28 PM, Richard Kenner wrote: Regardless of that sort of issue, I think on previous occasions when the topic of MISRA (or other coding standard) checking came up, there has been a general opinion from the gcc developers tha

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

On 09/01/17 20:11, Richard Kenner wrote: I suppose that would be true if you refer to MISRA in the messages. If you don't then you're not using the trademark. The issue isn't the messages. but how you describe what you've done in, say, documentation or ChangeLog entries. If you claim, in any

Re: Adoption of C subset standards

On 09/01/17 22:17, paul.kon...@dell.com wrote: > >> On Jan 9, 2017, at 4:08 PM, David Brown >> wrote: ... I found a reference to this in MISRA's forums: >> >> <https://www.misra.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=1189> >> >> The post and

Re: Bootstrap failure on aarch64-linux-gnu with trunk

g is complete. It's definitely the DSE patch. AIX bootstrapped but had many more testsuite failures. With the DSE patch removed, the testsuite failures are corrected. Thanks, David

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >