Hi all,
I got that, glibc can support SHA in crypt lib since v2.7.
There is a requirement in my application to use SHA, but update the
whole glibc is too risky. So I want to build a specific crypt lib for
the module using crypt function in my application.
Now the calling graph seems like this, fr
I have used MinGW on Linux to compile Windows
executables. I don't see why it could not be compiled
on other Unix variants. Try:
http://www.libsdl.org/extras/win32/cross/README.txt
and
http://www.mingw.org
Regards,
Andy
--- Ivan Novick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can y
> On Apr 28, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more simple.
>>
>> Looking at that presentation, the only thing missing for kernel is the
>> notrack thunks,
> On Apr 28, 2020, at 10:44 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:24 AM David Woodhouse wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 28 April 2020 17:14:49 BST, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Its fine to focus on userspace first, but t
d
still lose the five cycles in the full fast-path case, but we'd do
better in the slower paths, and the slower paths are becoming
increasingly important in real workloads.)
Thanks,
Andy
en.
(Presumably the PIC register on PIC builds would be an example of
that.)
--Andy
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 02:48 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:41 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 06/30/2015 02:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>> I'd say the most natural API for this would
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>
>
> On 06/30/2015 05:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 02:22:33PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm working on a massive set of cleanups to Linux'
ompile:
void func(void) __attribute__((used_reg("r12")));
void (*x)(void);
x = func;
--Andy
hing
}
I'd want the code that calls normal_func() to be understand that
normal_func() *will* preserve r12 despite the fact that weird_func is
allowed to clobber r12. I think this means that the attribute would
have to be an attribute of a function, not of the RA while compiling
the function.
--Andy
e that could be done in a clean,
extensible way.
--Andy
On Sep 1, 2015 6:53 PM, "Brian Gerst" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > Hi all-
> >
> > Linux has a handful of weird features that are only supported for
> > backwards compatibility. The big one is the x86_64 vsyscall
On Sep 1, 2015 6:12 PM, "Ian Lance Taylor" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> > Linux has a handful of weird features that are only supported for
> > backwards compatibility. The big one is the x86_64 vsyscall page, but
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:51:44PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Hi all-
>>
>> Linux has a handful of weird features that are only supported for
>> backwards compatibility. The big one is the x86_64 vsyscall p
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 08:39:27PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:51:44PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> >> Hi all-
>> &
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:32:22PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 08:39:27PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Sep 1
On Sep 2, 2015 6:57 AM, "Brian Gerst" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Sep 1, 2015 6:53 PM, "Brian Gerst" wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Andy Lutomirski
> >> wrote:
> &g
be able to either publish something in the
future, or make some money such that I can make a donation. In any event it has
been a lot of fun. Once again, thank you.
Andy
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
orrect code.
(TBH, it was never entirely clear to me that mfence is guaranteed to
flush the store buffer and force everything to be re-read from the
coherency domain, but if that's not true then it's pretty much
impossible to get this right.)
--Andy
I'm am fixing some reload bugs for AVR.
In a couple of situations an address is formed which included a SUBREG
expression.
I am not sure how I should be handling these. Initial attempts produce
sub-optimal code - and/or reload failures, so thought is a good idea to
get some advise!
Either
ux/Un*x purist camps but I like it :-) )
Reason, I ask is I would like to start to contribute and for me Cygwin
is the easiest target for me. But looking over things I'm not sure it
would be the best place to start to help things out.
Andy
--
Brain upgrade required: a working hypothalamus
On 14/11/2008, Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andy Scott wrote:
>
> > Looking over the bugzilla data base and archives of this (and other)
> > lists I was wondering about the level of support there is for GCC on
> > Cygwin. (I realise that it is weird
t more before posting on
their forums]
GCC Build One:
Again stage3 part of build, and this is what actually stops the build
the above issue doesn't seem to (I think it happens in stage 2), I get
the following:
/home/andy/live-gcc/my_gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/andy/live-gcc/my_gcc/
On 07/01/2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> Andy Scott wrote:
> > GCC Build One:
> >
> > Again stage3 part of build, and this is what actually stops the build
> > the above issue doesn't seem to (I think it happens in stage 2),
>
>
> That sentence contradicts
On 10/01/2009, Bernd Roesch wrote:
> Hello Dave
> >> Unix commad for stack increase(forget the name)
> >
> > 'ulimit'
>
>
> ah yes i see, I update from time and time and now its more.my bash show this
> now.Maybe Andy can do this test what his
2009/1/18 Dave Korn :
> Andy Scott wrote:
>
>> Again stage3 part of build, and this is what actually stops the build
>> the above issue doesn't seem to (I think it happens in stage 2), I get
>> the following:
>>
>>
>
> < a few more lin
On 18/01/2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> Andy Scott wrote:
>
> > Again stage3 part of build, and this is what actually stops the build
> > the above issue doesn't seem to (I think it happens in stage 2), I get
> > the following:
> >
> >
Abort
0x0014 Reserved
0x0018 IRQ
0x001C FIQ
so only the reset vector is at 0.
--
Andy Armstrong, Hexten
If I have RTL pattern such as:
(SET (MEM...) (MEM...))
(define_insn in backend target.md)
do I need to guard against the possibility that the two operands
overlap? Or does the front/middle end take care of any C/C++ language
specific needs here? (perhaps by using a register as an intermediate)
T
clearly work, but anyone using this mechanism
for SIGSEGV is probably asking for trouble.
--Andy
P.S. Just because you can probably get away with throwing a C++
exception from a signal handler right now does not mean it's a good
idea. Especially in a library.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:40 PM, David Daney wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 05:26 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Windows has a feature that I've wanted on Linux forever: stack-based
>> (i.e. scoped) exception handling. The upshot is that you can do,
>> roughly, this
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:17 PM, David Daney wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 05:50 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:40 PM, David Daney
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/18/2013 05:26 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:22 AM, David Daney wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 08:29 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Other way around: a *library* that wants to use exception handling
>> can't do so safely without the cooperation, or at least understanding,
>> of the main
that my Makefile(s) will now require a section specifically
dedicated to the .d file generation. Whereas I remember that this used
to be the way I had to construct the dependency list, this was
cumbersome and the way e.g. 4.4.4 supported automatic dependency
generation is preferable to me.
Thank you for your time,
Andy
Ping (with one correction).
> -Original Message-
> From: ANDY KENNEDY
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 3:16 PM
> To: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: Automatic dependency file generation bug/question
>
> Reading <http://gcc.gnu.org/news/dependencies.htm
-Wpragmas]
This seems to defeat the purpose, and adding
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wpragmas"
is a little gross. How am I supposed to do this?
Thanks,
Andy
will provide a link-time error if the non-constexpr function
is not defined, which is half-way there. Perhaps using the "unavailable"
attribute in conjunction with "constexpr_alias" would be the compile-time
solution...
Cheers
Andy
em, I doubt it is intended to provide such optimizations.
An additional cse pass after split would seem a better way perhaps?
Andy
Dave and Jeff,
Here are more details and I have include testcase, splitter patterns and
RTL dump to show problem in more detail.
The testcase is:
unsigned long f (unsigned char *P)
{
unsigned long C;
C = ((unsigned long)P[1] << 24)
| ((unsigned long)P[2] << 16)
| ((unsigned long)P
000a 0895 ret
Which is optimal. TADA!
This would indicate that simplify-rtx inside fwprop is removing OR Rx,0
but not picking up the the additionally revealed forward propagation
oppertunities
This would seem to be an avoidable limitation.
Andy
I very grateful for your help and wisdom
Testcase and MD Patch attached
unsigned long f (unsigned char *P)
{
unsigned long C;
C = ((unsigned long)P[1] << 24)
| ((unsigned long)P[2] << 16)
| ((unsigned long)P[3] << 8)
| ((unsigned long)P[4] << 0);
return C;
}
Index: avr.md
register islinked to 4 QImode DEFs - and fwprop
gives up.
Putting fwprop after subreg pass removes this problem - as the subreg
have then been converted to QImode psuedo regs and we get single DEF.
Andy
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
This would indicate that simplify-rtx inside fwprop is removing OR
that create_log_links, needs to distill the links down to
avoid duplicates, but I'm really not sure what to blame.
best regards
Andy
seriously consider this
request and provide some means by which to solve the issue.
regards
Andy
/compile/nested-1.c
will fail.
There are quite a few like this. I am hoping to get round to providing patches to correct these test cases. You will find a few more listed
in this valiant attempt of 2005:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-05/msg01919.html
Andy
There are several test in testsuite that use trampolines that are still
run with dejagnu switch set to no_trampolines.
Its on my TODO list for AVR target but a recent email reminded me that
it affects testing of other targets than can't or won't support
trampolines.
Theres an old patch by
Thank you so much.
I can test it easily and will let you know of any divergence from
original other than the those you mention.
Andy
Janis Johnson wrote:
On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 06:57 -0400, Andy H wrote:
There are several test in testsuite that use trampolines that are still
run with
EVEN and EIGHT and likely pick EVEN
because its bigger class. So I think that is perhaps reason. I think
order of classes maybe need to be changed or something else to prevent
problem with overlap (LOWER_EVEN? UPPER_EVEN)
But I could be completely wrong!
Andy
I want to add target specific tests for AVR.
These would be testcases for PR that fail related to AVR back end
problems - rather than testcases for generic PR.
Do I just add them to directory testsuite/gcc.target/avr? Or are there
some other configuration steps needed?
Andy
I came across this odd issue with testsuite test Wconversion-5.c and AVR
target.
I should get warning going from a unsigned value that is wider than
signed result.
As I am not skilled in the art of the all conversions rules. I would
appreciate some guidance before I report this as bug.
FYI
how I can patch testcase
correctly for AVR or post a bug.
best regards
Andy
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
2008/5/20 Andy H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I came across this odd issue with testsuite test Wconversion-5.c and AVR
target.
I should get warning going from a unsigned value that is wider than
Thanks Ian!
I found it in function.c (expand_function_start)
emit_move_insn (r_save, virtual_stack_vars_rtx);
Whereas it should be
emit_move_insn (r_save, targetm.builtin_setjmp_frame_value ());
to match same construction used for setjmp.
thanks for help!
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Thank you very much for reply. reload is such a lonely place!
TBH, it sounds like the opposite: LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS should
not be handling this address at all.
Yes but reload will not do anything before call to L_R_A. So in practice
that would mean L_R_A has
to check reg_equiv_constant[re
If L_R_A does nothing with it,
the normal reload handling will first try:
(const:HI (plus:HI (symbol_ref:HI ("chk_fail_buf") (const_int 2
This worked just as your described after I added test of
reg_equiv_constant[] inside L_R_A .
So I guess that looks like the fix for bug I post
Hi,
In the process of fixing tests for AVR and other small targets I have
come across issues with profile
tests in gcc/dg/struct that affect all targets and I would like reviewed
so I can raise patches to rectify them correctly.
Both involve random creating structures then setting and checkin
Help !
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-35.c is a test that looks for "Executing store motion" in
dump-tree-lim-details
As the load and store of memory location should be pulled out of loop.
This works for 3 out of 4 tescases. But on AVR target test3() will fail.
The only difference between this and te
as AVR does not have any vectors enabled by command line
or otherwise, the semantics are misleading.
Andy
I see it in godbolt
GCC compiles to:
movsx eax, BYTE PTR [rdi+2]
cmp al, 9
ja .L42
Clang:
movzx edx, byte ptr [rdi + 2]
cmp edx, 9
ja .LBB0_40
GCC extend with sign, Clang with zero.
cmp with 32 bit register is apparently faster than 8bit
pon., 24 kwi 2023 o 17:34 Basile Starynkevitch
napisał(a)
[name] "p" (ptr)
With this constraint, ptr must be uintptr_t or intptr_t. %[name]
refers to ptr, formatted as a dereference operation. So the generated
asm is identical to [name] "m" (*(char *)ptr), but the semantics are
different. The problem is that I don't know how to specify the
semantics, but at least the instant UB of building and dereferencing a
garbage pointer would be avoided.
--Andy
t;https://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/C-header-files.html>)
symbols:
__BEGIN_DECLS and __END_DECLS !
Also also stdio.h fails to include the missing _stdio.h which fails to include
the missing secure/_common.h !
Shocking !! ;-)
Thanks
Andy Miller
Thanks for your prompt reply (on a weekend!), Ian.
But I think we’re missing the point (see red text)…
> On Aug 31, 2024, at 11:01 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Hello Andy,
>
>> On 31 Aug 2024, at 23:14, Andy Miller via Gcc wrote:
>
>> After apparently easily ins
Is growth possible for a dollar a
day?..
Hi there! I'm Andy Roberts, and I've been closely analyzing the dynamic needs
of th
62 matches
Mail list logo
