Re: subversion status on gcc.gnu.org

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:15 AM Andreas Schwab via Overseers wrote: > > On Apr 06 2020, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 10:46:34AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > >> On 4/6/20 10:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 10:09:24AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:

scalar_storage_order question

Hi all (and Eric), I have a question about scalar_storage_order and support of type punning between types that have different byte order. Take: typedef unsigned char uint8_t; typedef unsigned int uint32_t; #define __big_endian__ scalar_storage_order("big-endian") #define __little_endian__ scalar

Re: scalar_storage_order question

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 1:14 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > I notice this statement in the documentation: > > Moreover, the use of type punning or aliasing to toggle the storage > > order is not supported; that is to say, a given scalar object cannot > > be accessed through distinct types that assi

Re: scalar_storage_order question

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:41 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > What if we had this: > > uint32_t u = 0x12345678; > > upal_u32be_t tempb; > > memcpy (&tempb, &u, sizeof(uint32_t)); > > uint32_t bu = tempb.val; > > > > Is that valid? We still run into the wrong code with the above case

Re: Should ARMv8-A generic tuning default to -moutline-atomics

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 6:25 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > > Distributions are receiving requests to build things with > -moutline-atomics: > > > > Should this be reflected in the GCC upstream defaults for ARMv8-A > generic tuning?

Re: Multilibs in stage-1

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:29 PM Uros Bizjak via Gcc wrote: > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:16 AM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On May 6, 2020 11:15:08 PM GMT+02:00, Uros Bizjak via Gcc > > wrote: > > >Hello! > > > > > >I wonder, if the build process really needs to build all multilibs in > > >st

Re: dejagnu version update?

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 9:02 PM Rob Savoye wrote: > > On 5/16/20 5:45 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > > Overall perhaps a patch management system might be good having to make > > chasing patches easier, such as patchwork, and we already use Git, so we > > As an old GNU project, we're required t

Re: Support for named address spaces in C++

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 2:32 PM Max Ruttenberg via Gcc wrote: > > Hi all, > > I’ve added a named address space to our backend and I noticed that it is only > support in C. > Has anyone had experience porting this feature to C++? Is there any technical > reason why it’s not supported? The main is

Re: Is it very hard to implement Zero-overhead deterministic exceptions: Throwing values??

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 2:27 PM Andi Kleen via Gcc wrote: > > sotrdg sotrdg via Gcc writes: > > > http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2018/p0709r0.pdf > > > > I really want this feature. How, it looks like this requires changes > > on RTL, gimple and C++ front-end. Is that very hard to

Re: TLS Implementation Across Architectures

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:34 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 2:54 PM Nathan Sidwell wrote: > > > On 6/25/20 2:34 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > RTEMS supports over 15 processor architectures and we would like to > > ensure > > > that TLS is supported on all rat

Re: Loading plugins with arm-none-eabi-gcc

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:25 PM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > I am currently trying to migrate a gcc plugin that has been well developed > for x86 code to ARM platform (for arm-none-eabi-gcc). > > Currently I did the following steps: > > 1. write a hello world program t.c > > 2. compil

Re: Loading plugins with arm-none-eabi-gcc

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:45 AM Shuai Wang wrote: > > Hey Andrew, > > Thanks a lot for getting back to me. No I am not. Let me clarify the context > here: > > 1. On my Ubuntu (x86-64 version), I use x86 gcc (version 10.0) to compile > this plugin, and test this plugin on various programs' GIMPL

Re: Built-in Specs ignored... unless -specs=dump is specified

On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 4:34 PM Giacomo Tesio wrote: > > Hello everybody! > > To cleanup my port of GCC (9.2.0) to Jehanne OS (http://jehanne.io) > I'd like to add a `--posixly` command line options to the gcc driver > that should be expanded to a couple of -isystem and -L options > to ease the co

Re: How to check reachable between blocks

On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:01 PM Jojo R wrote: > > Hi, > > Is there any API or common codes to check any two blocks is reachable > ? Yes the API in dominance.h. Depending on where you use it, you might need to have it created. Using calculate_dominance_info function. The function to do the

Re: Potential bug in GCC when compiling C to a flat binary

On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 5:41 PM Rhys Rustad-Elliott wrote: > > Hi all, > > I've encountered a strange issue when compiling C to a flat binary with GCC. > It's questionably a bug, but I hesitate to strongly say that due to my lack of > familiarity with the GCC codebase and the rather obscure nature

Re: GCC generates non-compliant MIPS relocation data? Obscure GNU extension?

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:15 PM Project Revolution via Gcc wrote: > > Hi GCC folks, > > We were working on a decompilation project for a Nintendo 64 title and > attempting to enable support for using GCC instead of the emulated IRIX > compiler and we ran into a big problem with how GCC generate

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars wrote: > > Hi, > > I just wrote this little program to demonstrate a possible flaw in both > malloc and calloc. > > If I allocate a the simplest memory region from main(), one out of three > optimization flags fail. > If I allocate the same region

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:37 AM Michael J. Baars wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:29 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just wrote this little program to demonstrate a possible flaw in both > > > malloc and callo

Re: A weird bug

On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 3:19 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Guys, > > I've been trying to debug a linker error (which I thought was a bug in > my optimization.) Well it turns out it occurs in a brand new virgin > version of the compiler running with binutils 2.36 which is the latest > version. I

Re: Failing in generated file options.c

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 7:41 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Guys, > > I checked out a fresh copy of the GCC sources today, applied somebodies > patch to it and voila! > > options.c:13591:2: error: #error Report option property is dropped #error > Report option property is dropped > > I built t

Re: removing toxic emailers

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:56 PM Frosku wrote: > > On Sat Apr 17, 2021 at 5:05 AM BST, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:16 PM Frosku wrote: > > > > > > When I refer to a 'California cultural standard', that's not > > > prescriptive. It's > > > just a reference to the fact tha

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:45 PM Josh Haberman via Gcc wrote: > > Would it be feasible to implement a "musttail" statement attribute in > GCC to get a guarantee that tail call optimization will be performed? > > Such an attribute has just landed in the trunk of Clang > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D99

Re: Some really strange GIMPLE

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 3:51 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > I'm chasing a bug and I used Creduce to produce a > reduced test case. However, that's really beside to > point. > > I this file: > > typedef struct basket { > } a; > long b; > a *basket; > int d, c, e;

Speed of compiling gimple-match.c

Hi all, I noticed my (highly, -j24) parallel build of GCC is serialized on compiling gimple-match.c. Has anyone looked into splitting this generated file into multiple files? Thanks, Andrew Pinski

Re: Speed of compiling gimple-match.c

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 1:19 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:01 PM Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 10:40:38AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > > On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 11:10 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc >

Re: gcc 11.1.0 mpfr

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 3:27 AM Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > On May 14, 2021 10:53:21 AM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška" wrote: > >On 5/12/21 10:51 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > >> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 6:34 PM Serge Belyshev via Gcc > > wrote: > >>> > >>> > $ egrep "mpfr\.h" log/cfg/

Signedness of boolean types (and Ada)

I noticed while debugging why my "A?CST1:CST0" patch was broken for Ada, I noticed the following ranges for boolean types: # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 _14 = checks__saved_checks_tos.482_2 > 0; # RANGE [0, 255] NONZERO 1 _18 = _14 == 0; _19 = ~_18; # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 _15 = _19; if

Re: Signedness of boolean types (and Ada)

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:52 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > I noticed while debugging why my "A?CST1:CST0" patch was broken for > Ada, I noticed the following ranges for boolean types: > # RANGE [0, 1] NONZERO 1 > _14 = checks__saved_checks_tos.482_2 > 0; > # RANGE [0, 255] NONZERO 1 > _18 =

Is NEGATE_EXPR gimple valid for pointer (and offset) types

While debugging PR 100925, I found that after my match.pd (for A?CST0:CST1) and phiopt patch to use match-and-simplify, gcc will produce an negate assignment gimple which has a pointer type (and offset type). Before we would produce "cond ? -1B : 0B" in this case but now we produce: _4 = a_2(D)

genmatch and cond vs "for (cnd cond vec_cond)" for gimple

Hi all, While moving the simple A CMP 0 ? A : -A patterns from fold_cond_expr_with_comparison to match, I ran into an issue where using cond directly in the patterns work while "for cnd (cond vec_cond)" don't work. It looks like in the first case we are able to correctly handle the cond first ope

Re: genmatch and cond vs "for (cnd cond vec_cond)" for gimple

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 4:54 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > Hi all, > While moving the simple A CMP 0 ? A : -A patterns from > fold_cond_expr_with_comparison to match, I ran into an issue where > using cond directly in the patterns work while "for cnd (cond > vec_cond)" don't work. > It looks like

Re: genmatch and cond vs "for (cnd cond vec_cond)" for gimple

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 5:21 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 4:54 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > While moving the simple A CMP 0 ? A : -A patterns from > > fold_cond_expr_with_comparison to match, I ran into an issue where > > using cond directly in the patterns

Re: Some libgcc headers are missing the runtime exception

On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 10:40 AM David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 1:31 PM Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > > > David Edelsohn writes: > > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 12:53 PM Richard Sandiford via Gcc > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> It was pointed out to me off-li

Re: gcc plugin on MacOS failure

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 7:37 AM Marc wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a gcc plugin (for afl++, > https://github.com/AFLplusplus/AFLplusplus) that works fine when > compiled on Linux but when compiled on MacOS (brew install gcc) it fails: > > ~/afl++ $ g++-11 -g -fPIC -std=c++11 > -I/usr/local/Cellar/gcc/

Re: [RFC] Adding a new attribute to function param to mark it as constant

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > Continuing from this thread, > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html > The proposal is to provide a mechanism to mark a parameter in a > function as a literal constant. > > Motivation: > Consider

Re: How to detect user uses -masm=intel?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 6:41 PM unlvsur unlvsur via Gcc wrote: > > Any GCC macro that can tell the code it is using the intel format’s assembly > instead of at&t?? Inside the inline-asm you can use the alternative. Like this: cmp{b}\t{%1, %h0|%h0, %1} This is how GCC implements this inside too.

Re: Porting to gcc 11 / intrinsics

On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 6:39 PM NightStrike via Gcc wrote: > > Should I make this a bugzilla? I guess I figured that wouldn't be > appropriate. I don't see a reason why this should go into porting as there was no change needed from previous versions of GCC. Supporting -mno-sse is a new feature ev

[FYI] bugzilla cleanup

Hi all, I am doing some bugzilla cleanup. This includes disabling some components and some versions for new bugs. So far I have disabled versions before GCC 4 because we have not had a report from someone for those versions in over 7 years. I disabled some versions which are about developmental

Re: Can gcc.dg/torture/pr67828.c be an infinite loop?

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:05 AM Aldy Hernandez via Gcc wrote: > > Hi folks. > > My upcoming threading improvements turn the test below into an infinite > runtime loop: > > int a, b; > short c; > > int > main () > { >int j, d = 1; >for (; c >= 0; c++) > { > BODY: >a = d; >

Re: Can gcc.dg/torture/pr67828.c be an infinite loop?

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:35 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > > > On 9/24/21 11:29 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:05 AM Aldy Hernandez via Gcc > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi folks. > >> > >> My upcoming threading improvements turn the test below into an infinite > >> runtime loop: >

Re: assembler errors when bootstrapping with #pragma optimize "0"

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 5:07 PM Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: > > I put #pragma GCC optimize "0" at the top of gimplify.c to help > me debug something in a bootstrapped compiler. The file failed > to compile with many assembler errors like this: > > /tmp/ccL9zcXD.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/ccL9z

Re: Query regarding unusual behaviour for tail padding with different c++ standards

On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 9:04 PM Nayan Deshmukh via Gcc wrote: > #include > #include > #include > struct A { > int a; > uint64_t b; > int c = -1; > }; The question becomes is the above a standard layout class or not. I Noticed clang does not change the rules for layout between C++11 and C

Re: Inconsistent segmentation fault in GCC

On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 5:07 PM Alessandro Baretta via Gcc wrote: > > Hello GCC hackers, and thank you very much for your precious work here. > > I've been observing somewhat random GCC segfaults in my C++ 20 > codebase for a while. By "random" I mean that if I rerun the cmake > build after a fail

Re: _Float16-related failures on x86_64-apple-darwin

On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 14:24 FX via Gcc wrote: > Hi, > > Some recently introduced tests have been failing for several weeks on > x86_64-apple-darwin. > > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cond_op_maxmin__Float16-1.c > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-copysign-1.c > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr102464-fma.c > FAIL: g

Re: Why doesn't this pattern match?

On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:13 PM Andras Tantos wrote: > > Hello! > > My name is Andras Tantos and I just joined this list, so if I'm asking > something off-topic or not following the rules of the community, please > let me know. > > What I'm working on is to port GCC (and Binutils) to a new CPU ISA,

Re: Mass rename of C++ .c files to .cc suffix?

On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 2:35 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote: > > Martin Jambor writes: > > Hi, > > > > Would anyone be terribly against mass renaming all *.c files (that are > > actually C++ files) within the gcc subdirectory to ones with .cc suffix? > > > > We already have 47 files with suffi

Re: reordering of trapping operations and volatile

On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 12:33 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote: > > > Hi Richard, > > I have a question regarding reodering of volatile > accesses and trapping operations. My initial > assumption (and hope) was that compilers take > care to avoid creating traps that are incorrectly > ordered relativ

Re: What's wrong with this RTL?

On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 8:49 PM Andras Tantos wrote: > > All! > > I'm trying to port GCC to a new target, I call 'brew'. I've based it on > the Moxie target mostly because of it's simplicity. > > I must be doing something horribly wrong as the following C code crokes > in the LRA path: > >long

Re: Prerequisites page lists http://multiprecision.org but it supports https too/instead

On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 12:20 PM Jonathan Leffler via Gcc wrote: > > The prerequisites page https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html lists > (for MPC): > > It can be downloaded from http://www.multiprecision.org/mpc/. > > > The website actually supports https now: https://www.multiprecision.o

Re: [Intel SPR] Progress of GCC support for Intel SPR features

On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 5:59 PM LiYancheng via Gcc wrote: > > Hello everyone! > > I have some questions to ask: > > 1. How does GCC support Sapphrie Rapids CPU now? > > 2. Does GCC 11 fully support all the features of SPR? > From the release note, it seems that 5g ISA (fp16)/hfni is > not supporte

Re: Validation of adding left shift stmt at GIMPLE - [Custom GCC plugin]]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:04 AM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > I want to know whether it is correct to add left shift instruction to > a constant expression statement like "_3 + 4"? > > I am trying to add a left shift instruction in between below GIMPLE > instructions - > >: >

Re: Validation of adding left shift stmt at GIMPLE - [Custom GCC plugin]]

On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:45 AM Shubham Narlawar wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 1:15 AM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:04 AM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I want to know whether it is correct to add left shift instruction to > >

Re: What replaces FOR_EACH_LOOP_FN

On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 2:05 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Guys, > > I've been working on an optimization for quite a bit of time and > in an attempt to move it to GCC 12 I found that FOR_EACH_LOOP_FN > no longer exists. I poked around in the archives and tried a Google > search but found nothi

Re: __attribute__ ((access, ...)) vs __attribute__ ((nonnull))

On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 1:25 PM David Malcolm via Gcc wrote: > > We gained __attribute__ ((access, ...)) in GCC 10: > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html > which identifies one of the pointer/reference arguments of a function > as being accessed according to an acce

Re: Is this a possible wrong-code issue?

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 8:21 PM Haoxin Tu via Gcc wrote: > > Dear developers, > > May I seek your confirmation to check whether the following program > triggers a true wrong-code issue or not? I don't want to make noise to the > bug repository so I'd like to seek your confirmation here first. > >

Re: -Wstringop-overflow complains about pointers holding explicitly set addresses

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:42 AM Guy Benyei via Gcc wrote: > > Hello all, > Compiling for RISC-V, I've ran into an error like this: > > tmp.c:15:3: error: 'memcpy' writing 4 bytes into a region of size 0 overflows > the destination [-Werror=stringop-overflow=] >15 | memcpy(&str2->c, &str1->c

Re: [PATCH] arm64/io: Remind compiler that there is a memory side effect

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 10:24 AM Mark Rutland via Gcc wrote: > > Hi Jeremy, > > Thanks for raising this. > > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 11:44:06AM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > The relaxed variants of read/write macros are only declared > > as `asm volatile()` which forces the compiler to generate t

Re: config/dfp.m4 license?

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 1:45 AM Christophe Lyon via Gcc wrote: > > Hi! > > The config/dfp.m4 file does not have a license header. Several other .m4 > files in the same directory have a GPL header, many others do not. > > Can someone confirm the license of dfp.m4 and add the missing header if > app

Re: syntax errors

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 3:19 PM André Coelho via Gcc wrote: > > Hey...if the compiler can check syntax errors...why can't it fixed them? In some cases it does recommend ways of fixing it. But not all syntax errors are fixable. Also not all syntax errors might be the wrong behavior vs what the use

Re: GCC 9.5 Release Candidate available

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 1:03 AM Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > > The first release candidate for GCC 9.5 is available from > > https://sourceware.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9.5.0-RC-20220520/ > > and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit > 1bc79c506205b6a5db82897340bdebaaf7ada9

Re: [MRISC32] Not getting scaled index addressing in loops

On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:52 PM m wrote: > > Hello! > > I maintain a fork of GCC which adds support for my custom CPU ISA, > MRISC32 (the machine description can be found here: > https://github.com/mrisc32/gcc-mrisc32/tree/mbitsnbites/mrisc32/gcc/config/mrisc32 > ). > > I recently discovered that

Re: Gcc Digest, Vol 29, Issue 7

On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 12:21 AM Yair Lenga via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > > Wanted to get some feedback on an idea that I have - trying to address the > age long issue with type check on VA list function - like 'scanf' and > friends. In my specific case, I'm trying to build code that will parse a > list

Re: Possible C++ method signature warning feature?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 6:20 PM Paul Koning via Gcc wrote: > > There's a C++ problem I keep running into, in a very large body of software > with lots of subclassing. > > There's a base class that defines a set of interface methods, not all pure > virtual (some define the default behavior). A n

Re: [PATCH 0/3] picolibc: Add picolibc linking help

On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 11:12 AM Keith Packard via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Picolibc is a C library for embedded systems based on code from newlib > and avr libc. To connect some system-dependent picolibc functions > (like stdio) to an underlying platform, the platform may provide an OS > library. >

Re: gcc-bug in gcc-11

On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 9:18 AM Shivam Rajput via Gcc wrote: > > Hey, I was trying to build clang's libcxx on my ubuntu 22.04 and it has > gcc-11.2 by default most prolly, but while building libcxx there was an > error about using the deleted function but it seems that overloaded > resolution in gc

Re: How do I create a GCC source code tarball?

On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 4:32 PM Robert Dubner wrote: > > I have modified the source code of GCC, and I need a tarball for that > modified source. > > My code is based on the trunk branch of the repository at > git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git > > I attempted to execute "make dist", and have encountere

Re: [RFC] c++: parser - Support for target address spaces in C++

On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 7:15 AM Paul Iannetta via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > > Presently, GCC supports target address spaces as a GNU extension (cf. > `info -n "(gcc)Named Address Spaces"`). This is however supported > only by the C frontend, which is a bit sad, since all the GIMPLE > machinery is readi

Re: Need help with match.pd crash

On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 4:00 PM Michael Collison wrote: > > I am trying to improve code generation for coremark to match a recent > improvement that was made in LLVM. > > I added the following transformation to match.pd which attempts to > replace a branch with straight line code: > > /* (cond (and

Re: why does gccgit require pthread?

On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 7:59 PM LIU Hao via Gcc wrote: > > Greetings, > > At the moment, there are references to pthread mutexes in > 'gcc/jit/libgccjit.cc' and > 'gcc/git/jit-playback.cc'. The former was introduced by > 63b2923dc6f57e74d964a9cf14f4ba595ab14ed9 in > 2020, while the latter was int

Re: why does gccgit require pthread?

On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 10:51 PM LIU Hao wrote: > > 在 2022-11-07 12:37, Andrew Pinski 写道: > > > > The original code which used pthread was added in GCC 5 way before GCC > > moved to being written in C++11 which was only in the last 3 years. > > pthread_* functions were the best choice at the time (

Issues with Sphinx

Can we just revert back to texinfo? Sphinx requires manual page splitting which is a downgrade from texinfo. Stable URLs and links was something which we pushed for fixes for texinfo too. And many other issues with sphinx which makes it better if we revert back to texinfo until those are fixed incl

Re: Different outputs in Gimple pass dump generated by two different architectures

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 12:57 AM Marc Glisse via Gcc wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Kevin Lee wrote: > > > While looking at the failure for gcc.dg/uninit-pred-9_b.c, I observed that > > x86-64 and risc-v has a different output for the gimple pass since > > r12-4790-g4b3a325f07acebf4 > >

Re: [BUG] -Wuninitialized: initialize variable with itself

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:36 AM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > > While discussing some idea for a new feature, I tested the following example > program: > > > int main(void) > { > int i = i; > return i; > } This is NOT a bug but a documented way of ha

Re: [BUG] -Wuninitialized: initialize variable with itself

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:40 AM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:36 AM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > While discussing some idea for a new feature, I tested the following example > > program: > > > > > > int main(void) > > { > > int i

Re: [BUG] -Wuninitialized: initialize variable with itself

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:41 AM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:40 AM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:36 AM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > While discussing some idea for a new feature, I tested the following > > > ex

Re: [whish] -Wunterminated-string-initialization: new warning

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 1:57 PM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote: > > Hi! > > I'd like to get warnings if I write the following code: > > char foo[3] = "foo"; This should be easy to add as it is already part of the -Wc++-compat option as for C++ it is invalid code. :2:19: warning: initializer-str

Re: -Warray-bounds interprets int *var as int var[0] ?

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 9:15 AM Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > The following code throws a warning which I do not understand. > > Purpose is to save and restore SREG, which is a special function > register (SFR) defined by its hardware address as: > > #define SREG (*(volatile uint8_t*) (0x3F + __AVR_

Re: Can't build Ada

On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 11:59 AM Paul Koning via Gcc wrote: > > I'm trying to use fairly recent GCC sources (the gcc-darwin branch to be > precise) to build Ada, starting with the latest (2020) release of Gnat from > Adacore. Are you building a cross compiler or a native compiler? If you are bu

Re: Can't build Ada

On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:08 PM Paul Koning wrote: > > > > > On Nov 25, 2022, at 3:03 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 11:59 AM Paul Koning via Gcc > > wrote: > >> > >> I'm trying to use fairly recent GCC sources (the gcc-darwin branch to be > >> precise) to build Ada,

Re: [PATCH] Various pages: SYNOPSIS: Use VLA syntax in function parameters

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 1:05 PM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote: > > Hi! > > I'll probably have to release again before the Debian freeze of Bookworm. > That's something I didn't want to do, but there's some important bug that > affects downstream projects (translation pages), and I need to release

Re: RFC: Make builtin types only valid for some target features

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 11:33 PM Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote: > > "Kewen.Lin" writes: > > Hi, > > > > I'm working to find one solution for PR106736, which requires us to > > make some built-in types only valid for some target features, and > > emit error messages for the types when the conditi

Re: A problem of weak & weakref function attribute

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 7:17 PM 刘畅 via Gcc wrote: > > Hi all, > > I met a problem when I was testing the weak attribute and the weakref > attribute of GCC. I've read the documentation and in the 6.33.1 Common > Function Attributes - weakref part I found: > > Without a target given as an argumen

Re: Bug with GCC's handling of lifetimes of implicit-lifetime types

On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 10:36 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 17:42, Gavin Ray via Gcc wrote: > > > > This came up when I was asking around about what the proper way was to: > > > > - Allocate aligned storage for a buffer pool/page cache > > - Then create pointers to

Re: [BUG] missing warning for pointer arithmetic out of bounds

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 11:16 AM Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote: > > > > On 12/13/22 20:08, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > Hi! > > > > For the following program: > > > > > > $ cat buf.c > > #include > > > > int main(void) > > { > > char *p, buf[5]; > > > > p =

Re: [-Wstringop-overflow=] strncat(3)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 2:46 PM Alejandro Colomar via Libc-alpha wrote: > > Hi, > > I was rewriting the strncat(3) manual page, and when I tried to compile the > example program, I got a surprise from the compiler. > > Here goes the page: > > >strncat(3) Library Functions Manual

Re: Document how to build PGO-optimized GCC version

On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 9:38 PM Alexander Zaitsev wrote: > > Hello. > > We are using GCC for our C++ projects. Our projects are huge, commit > rate is quite huge, so our CI workers are always busy (so as any other > CI workers, honestly). Since we want to increase build speed, one of the > option

Re: B^HDEAD code generation (AMD64)

On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 4:42 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > "Thomas Koenig" wrote: > > > On 09.01.23 12:35, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> 20 superfluous instructions of the total 102 instructions! > > > > The proper place for bug reports is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ . > > OUCH: there's NO proper pl

Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] P1689R5 support

On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 1:07 PM Ben Boeckel via Fortran wrote: > > Hi, > > This patch series adds initial support for ISO C++'s [P1689R5][], a > format for describing C++ module requirements and provisions based on > the source code. This is required because compiling C++ with modules is > not emb

get_range_query vs NULL argument

Hi, While fixing PR 108354, I came across that ssa_name_has_boolean_range calls get_range_query with cfun as the argument but sometimes while in IPA passes cfun is currently nullptr. The question should we check the argument before calling get_range_query or is it a valid thing to call it with a

Re: get_range_query vs NULL argument

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:30 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > > On 2/15/23 14:50, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > Hi, > >While fixing PR 108354, I came across that > > ssa_name_has_boolean_range calls get_range_query with cfun as the > > argument but sometimes while in IPA passes cfun is currently nullpt

Re: PROBLEM !!! __ OS: ANY LINUX __ COMPILERS: gcc & g++ __ OUTPUT: BAD!!!

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:46 AM oszibarack korte via Gcc wrote: > > *An unsolved problem for more than a decade!* > *Dear GNU Compiler Collection development team!* > > *There is a problem with the gcc and g++ compilers for Linux operating > systems!* > *Here are 3 pieces of C and 3 pieces of C++

Re: GCC ASAN breaks glob()?

On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 12:01 PM Paul Smith wrote: > > OK here's something super-strange I discovered: > > Enabling -faddress=sanitize in GCC, causes the glob(3) function to > misbehave. > > I'm using GCC 11.3 / glibc 2.35 (x86_64 native). I have this simple > program: Maybe https://gcc.gnu.org/

MIN/MAX and trapping math and NANs

Hi, I noticed while working on phi-opt, that MIN/MAX EXPR (and the corresponding RTL codes) both can return true for trapping even if NANs are not honored (that is -ffinite-math-only). Is this true? I would have assumed when -ffinite-math-only -fno-signed-zeros is used, then MIN/MAX would be the

Re: gcc with the new WIN32 threads fails to compile libstdc++

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 12:16 AM Julian Waters via Gcc wrote: > > Hi all, > > When trying to compile gcc with the revamped WIN32 threading model which > supports C++11 threads, libstdc++ always fails to link with the following > error: those functions should have been included in newly built libg

Re: Hosting our gfortran MatterMost workspace

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 8:32 AM Jerry D via Fortran wrote: > > Hello all and gcc overseers, > > I received a notice that the MasterMost server providers decided to drop > their free service. Unfortunate and understandable. > > I plan to contact the Open Software Lab folks at Oregon State Universit

Re: libsanitizer: sync from master

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 7:47 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > Hi. > > I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and > ppc64le-linux systems. > Moreover, I run bootstrap on x86_64-linux and checked ABI difference with > abidiff. This broke hwasan on aarch64. See https://gcc.

Re: Will GCC eventually support SSE2 or SSE4.1?

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:56 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > Hi, > > compile the following function on a system with Core2 processor > (released January 2008) for the 32-bit execution environment: > > --- demo.c --- > int ispowerof2(unsigned long long argument) > { > return (argument & argument

Re: Another epic optimiser failure

On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:38 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > "Jakub Jelinek" wrote, completely clueless: > > > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 11:04:11PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> OUCH: popcnt writes the WHOLE result register, there is ABSOLUTELY > >> no need to clear it beforehand nor to clea

Re: Who cares about performance (or Intel's CPU errata)?

On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:25 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > Just to show how SLOPPY, INCONSEQUENTIAL and INCOMPETENT GCC's developers are: > > --- dontcare.c --- > int ispowerof2(unsigned __int128 argument) { > return __builtin_popcountll(argument) + __builtin_popcountll(argument >> > 64) == 1;

Re: Who cares about performance (or Intel's CPU errata)?

On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 3:54 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > "Andrew Pinski" wrote: > > > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:25 PM Stefan Kanthak > > wrote: > >> > >> Just to show how SLOPPY, INCONSEQUENTIAL and INCOMPETENT GCC's developers > >> are: > >> > >> --- dontcare.c --- > >> int ispowerof2(unsign

  1   2   >