Re: Question about undefined functions' parameters during LTO

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 5:31 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello, > > I am trying to find out the arguments of functions which are undefined > during LTO. > > Basically: > > gcc_assert(in_lto_p && !cnode->definition) > // Do we have arguments? > gcc_assert(DECL_ARGUMENTS(cnode->decl)) // fails > // No

Re: How to extend SLP to support this case

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:32 PM Tamar Christina wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: Gcc On Behalf Of Richard Biener > > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 11:12 AM > > To: Kewen.Lin > > Cc: GCC Development ; Segher Boessenkool > > > > Subject: Re: How to extend SLP to support this ca

Re: Thought on inlining indirect function calls

On March 14, 2020 10:55:09 AM GMT+01:00, "FRÉDÉRIC RECOULES" wrote: >Hello the GCC community, >I just want to share some thoughts on inlining a function even if >it is called through a function pointer. >My starting point is the version 9.2 (used at https://godbolt.org/), >so I am sorry if someth

Re: Fw: GSoC topic: Implement hot cold splitting at GIMPLE IR level

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 3:33 PM Aditya K via Gcc wrote: > > As I understand the openmp outliner is also at the tree level. A region based > outliner could be reused there. I’m not particular about the outliner being > specific to ipa-split. A GSoC project can help us get the coding+testing > do

Re: Not usable email content encoding

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 2:28 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Tom Tromey: > > > Also, gerrit was pretty bad about threading messages, so it became quite > > hard to follow progress in email (but following all patches in the web > > interface is very difficult, a problem shared by all these web UIs).

Re: Vectorization Messages

On March 24, 2020 5:45:05 PM GMT+01:00, Roger Martz via Gcc wrote: >I was glad to see that compiler flags such as -fopt-info-vec-missed ... >provide information about what is happening under the hood w.r.t code >that >can and can't be vectorized. > >Can anyone point me to a document, etc. that wo

Re: Question on lto-stream-out

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:01 PM lizekun (A) wrote: > > Hi, > I have a question on function "get_symbol_initial_value" in lto-stream-out.c. > > When the initial value of symbol is constructor, it will be replaced by an > error_mark. > What's the benefit of donging this? In some cases, it increase

Re: Question on lto-stream-out

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 2:00 PM lizekun (A) wrote: > > Thanks for replying! > > I've dumped the lto stream-out file and noticed that constructors are > streamed to > function_body. > Also, I noticed that, the binany which is generated when streaming > constructors > to function_body has bigger

Re: [QUESTION] About RTL optimization at forward propagation

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 4:19 AM xiezhiheng wrote: > > Hi, > I find there exists some restricts in function fwprop preventing it to > forward propagate addresses into loops. > /* Go through all the uses. df_uses_create will create new ones at the >end, and we'll go through them as well. > >

Re: Question about undefined functions' parameters during LTO

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:54 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello Micheal, > > Thanks for this lead! It is almost exactly what I need. I do have one > more question about this. It seems that the types obtained via > FOR_EACH_FUNCTION_ARGS and TREE_TYPE are different pointers when > compiled with -flto.

Re: Question about undefined functions' parameters during LTO

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:41 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > > On 07/04/2020 14:34, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020, Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > >> Thanks for this lead! It is almost exactly what I need. I do have one more > >> question about this. It seems that the types obtaine

Re: Vectorization of loop which operate on local arrays

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 4:39 PM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > I am working on gcc-4.9.4 and encountered different results of loop > vectorization on array arr0, arr1 and arr2. > > Testcase - > > int main() > { > int i; > for (i=0; i<64; i++) > { > arr2[i]=(

Re: [RFC, doloop] How to deal with invariants introduced by doloop

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:10 PM Kewen.Lin via Gcc wrote: > > Hi all, > > This is one question origining from PR61837, which shows that doloop > pass could introduce some loop invariants against its outer loop when > doloop performs and prepares the iteration count for hardware > count register ass

Re: SH Port Status

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:05 PM Jeff Law via Gcc wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 15:29 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 3:13 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 14:47 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > Over at RTEMS, we were discussing

Re: Help implementing support for vec in gengtype

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:45 PM Giuliano Belinassi wrote: > > Hi. Sorry for the late reply. > > On 03/02, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 6:56 PM Giuliano Belinassi > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, all. > > > > > > I am tying to fix an issue with a global variable in the parallel gcc

Re: [RFC, doloop] How to deal with invariants introduced by doloop

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:42 AM Kewen.Lin wrote: > > on 2020/4/17 下午7:32, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:10 PM Kewen.Lin via Gcc wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> This is one question origining from PR61837, which shows that doloop > >> pass could introduce some loop invari

Re: Help implementing support for vec in gengtype

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:56 PM Giuliano Belinassi wrote: > > Hi, Richi > > On 04/21, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:45 PM Giuliano Belinassi > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi. Sorry for the late reply. > > > > > > On 03/02, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 6:56

Re: Not usable email content encoding

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:47 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Tamar Christina: > > > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well > > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness > > guarantee. another patch could be approved after mine (with hours > > in between

Re: Question about alias or points-to analysis

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hi, > > I am trying to find out how to use the alias and/or points-to analysis > in GCC. Ideally, I would like to find a function that given an > allocation site, the return value is a set of pointers which may point > to memory allocated from

Re: Question about alias or points-to analysis

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:04 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > > On 06/05/2020 14:25, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Erick Ochoa > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I am trying to find out how to use the alias and/or points-to analysis > >> in GCC. Ideally, I would like to find

Re: Multilibs in stage-1

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 >stage-1 bootstrap build. IIRC, stage-1 uses system compiler to build >stage-1 gcc, so there is no need for multilibs, apart from library >that will be

Re: Multilibs in stage-1

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:25 AM Uros Bizjak 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 > > >stage-1 boo

Re: Question about alias or points-to analysis

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 9:25 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > > On 06/05/2020 18:40, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:04 PM Erick Ochoa > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 06/05/2020 14:25, Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Erick Ochoa > >>> wrote: > > >>

Re: Multilibs in stage-1

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:24 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 09:02:58AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > Hmm. IIRC it required special-handling in the individual libs - Jakub > > may remeber (IIRC > > he implemented short-cutting libsanitizer builds) > > Just fuzzy memories, bu

Re: performance of exception handling

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:14 AM Thomas Neumann via Gcc wrote: > > > Not all GCC/G++ targets are GNU/Linux and use GLIBC. A duplicate > > implementation in GLIBC creates its own set of advantages and > > disadvantages. > > so what should I do now? Should I try to move the lookup into GLIBC? Or > h

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:44 PM 易会战 via Gcc wrote: > > hi, I am working on gcc ssa name. For each function, we can traverse all > defined ssa name by macro FOR_EACH_SSA_NAME. If a ssa name is default > definition for a symbol (check SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF) , I can get the > symbol by SSA_NAME_

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:16 PM 易会战 wrote: > > thanks a lot. I will check your advice. > Can you give some explaination about memory ssa, and how to use it. I check > internal, cannot get it. Maybe you know some examples or some more materials. memory SSA in GCC is simply a SSA chain of all memo

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 6:03 AM 易会战 wrote: > > It seems the function ptr_deref_may_alias_global_p cannot give right result. > For example, > int func(int size, int i) > { > int * sum; > sum = malloc() > here some code access sum pointing to memory > return sum[i] > } > ptr_deref_may_alias_glob

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:08 AM 易会战 wrote: > > yes, it does not escape the function, but indeed allocate memory on heap. > There is much specific method to judge the memory on heap although not escape > the function? Not at the moment. The info is computed by tree-ssa-structalias.c in compute

Re: Automatically generated ChangeLog files - PHASE 1

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 5/13/20 10:16 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > As far as this particular example goes, shouldn't the "testsuite/" line > > be dropped from the above? > > Good point. Fixes now with: > > $ ./git_email.py > patches/0020-IPA-Avoid-segfault-

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:38 AM 易会战 wrote: > > now I am working on gcc-9.3, can you give the specific code location to check > not escaped heap? I try to add a flag. set_uids_in_ptset > ---Original--- > From: "Richard Biener" > Date: Wed, May 13, 2020 17:28 PM > To: "易会战"; > Cc: "gcc"; > Subje

Re: how to find variable related to a virtual ssa name

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 6:00 AM 易会战 wrote: > > There are some other cases that I cannot get right answer. > case1: interproceduure > func(int*arg) > { > return arg[0] + arg[1] > } > func2() > { > int a[10] > return func(a); > } > here func cannot tell arg is local var. > > case 2: global array po

Re: Writing automated tests for the GCC driver

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:00 PM Giuliano Belinassi via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, all. > > GCC have a extensive testsuite, that is no news at all. However they are > focused on the compiler (cc1*) or in libraries, and I can't find tests > related to the GCC driver. > > Are there tests to the GCC driver?

Re: Writing automated tests for the GCC driver

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:37 PM Giuliano Belinassi wrote: > > Hi, > > On 05/22, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:00 PM Giuliano Belinassi via Gcc > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, all. > > > > > > GCC have a extensive testsuite, that is no news at all. However they are > > > focused

Re: [1-800-GIT-HELP] Backporting a series of commits into a combined commit?

On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 2:17 PM Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > > For now, I would recommend doing 1:1 backports. Otherwise, you'll need > > to merge > > all ChangeLog entries in a format the server hook accepts. That can > > require some > > work. > > If the first commit caused

Re: Question about comparing function function decls

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:24 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > > > > > I'm trying to determine during LTO optimization (with one partition) > whether of not a function call is to a function in the partition. > > Here is the routine I've written. Note, I'm willing t

Re: gcc math functions for OpenMP vectoization

On June 5, 2020 7:58:20 PM GMT+02:00, Toon Moene wrote: >On 6/5/20 6:10 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote: > >> On 6/5/20 4:11 PM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: > >>> It is glibc that provides them, not GCC. >>> See >>> >https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=sysdeps/x86/fpu/bits/math-vector.h;h=0

Re: Inquire a potential bug when printing out GIMPLE ASAN statements

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:38 AM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello! > > I am writing to report a potential bug I encountered when playing with the > GIMPLE IR. I enabled the ASan and would like to print out all ASAN_MARK > statements for the following simple code: > > int main(int argc ,char **ar

Re: Seeking clarification and way forward on limited scope variables.

On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 8:00 AM Tomar, Sourabh Singh wrote: > > [AMD Official Use Only - Internal Distribution Only] > > Hello Everyone, > > I need to have your thoughts on this. > > Consider the following test case -- > --- > 1int main(int Argc, char **

Re: Push to my private branches is disallowed

On June 15, 2020 6:05:26 PM GMT+02:00, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >Hi! > >$ git push -n fsf >To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git > + 1db88c6...71e5e35 cc0 -> refs/users/segher/heads/cc0 (forced update) > >$ git push fsf >Counting objects: 664, done. >Delta compression using up to 64 threads. >Com

Re: SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT or print_gimple_stmt for MEM_REF seems mal-functional

On June 15, 2020 6:31:38 PM GMT+02:00, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: >Hello, > >Suppose given the following SSA statement generated by the `sanopt` >pass: > > _17 = (signed char *) _16; > _18 = *_17; > >I am using the following code to identify that _17 depends on _16: > >// def_stmt refers to _1

Re: Push to my private branches is disallowed

On June 15, 2020 7:19:13 PM GMT+02:00, Joseph Myers wrote: >On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >> It should never send email for things that are on master (or any >release >> branch) already. > >https://github.com/AdaCore/git-hooks/issues/9 > >https://github.com/AdaCore/git-hooks/pu

Re: SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT or print_gimple_stmt for MEM_REF seems mal-functional

On June 15, 2020 6:58:27 PM GMT+02:00, Shuai Wang wrote: >Thank you very much for your prompt response, Rchard. Sorry I was kinda >"learning by doing". I am familiar with LLVM stuff but newbie to GCC >specifications. > >Just want to make sure I got it right; _17 and _16 in the IR code are >SSA >v

Re: SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT or print_gimple_stmt for MEM_REF seems mal-functional

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 5:00 AM Shuai Wang wrote: > > Yes, TREE_CODE (op1) != SSA_NAME shows that op1 is by no means SSA names > (although I don't know why). But how can I backwardly identify its > initialization statement _17 = (signed char *) _16? Thanks! You want to walk over SSA operands o

Re: Re-optimize instrumented GIMPLE code

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:11 AM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > Suppose I have changed certain if condition in the GIMPLE code (generated > by the `sanopt` pass) into the following format: > > if (0 == 1) > { > > } > > Then, in order to completely remove this unnecessary if condit

Re: Exception at "need_ssa_update_p" during GIMPLE instrumentation

On June 21, 2020 11:38:49 AM GMT+02:00, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: >OK, I think I know how to solve it. Just return TODO_update_ssa >. If you dump with -vops you'll likely see that virtual operands got out of sync. You can either manually copy

Re: GIMPLE problem

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:36 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > I'm somehow misusing GIMPLE (probably in multiple ways) and I need > some help in straightening out this little mess I've made. > > I'm trying to do the following: > > In an attempt at structure reorganization (instance interleaving) a

Re: GIMPLE problem

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:05 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Richard, > > First off I did suspect INDIRECT_REF wasn't supported, thanks for > confirming that. > > I tried what you said in the original code before I posted > but I suspect how I went at it is the problem. I'm probably > doing some

Re: Hoisting DFmode loads out of loops..

On June 26, 2020 3:24:24 AM GMT+02:00, Alan Lehotsky wrote: >On Jun 25, 2020, at 6:37 PM, Jeff Law >mailto:l...@redhat.com>> wrote: > >On Thu, 2020-06-25 at 15:46 -0400, Alan Lehotsky wrote: >I’m working on a GCC 8.3 port to a load/store architecture with a >32-bit data-path between registers and

Re: Support for named address spaces in C++

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:12 AM Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > Andrew Pinski via Gcc schrieb: > > 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

Re: Passing an string argument to a GIMPLE call

On June 27, 2020 6:21:12 AM GMT+02:00, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: >Hello, > >I am writing the following statement to make a GIMPLE call: > > tree function_fn_type = build_function_type_list(void_type_node, >void_type_node, integer_type_node, NULL_TREE); > tree sancov_fndecl = build_fn_de

Re: Passing an string argument to a GIMPLE call

On June 27, 2020 11:15:50 PM GMT+02:00, David Malcolm wrote: >On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 21:27 +0800, Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: >> Dear Richard, >> >> Thanks for the info. My bad, I will need to append "\0" at the end of >> the >> string. Also, a follow-up question which I just cannot find an >> answ

Re: RFC noipa sizeof function for record relayout at link time

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:56 AM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello, > > I have been working on link time optimization for C that may change the > size of structs (at link time). We are close to sharing the results we > have so far, but there are a couple of missing pieces left to work on: > > Implement

Re: RFC noipa sizeof function for record relayout at link time

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 1:05 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:56 AM Erick Ochoa > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I have been working on link time optimization for C that may change the > > size of structs (at link time). We are close to sharing the results we > > have so far

Re: An problematic interaction between a call created by gimple_build_call and inlining

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:49 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > I'm trying to generate calls to "free" on the fly at ipa time. > > I've tried several things (given below) but they both fail > in expand_call_inline in tree-inline.c on this gcc_checking_assert: > > cg_edge = id->dst_node->get_edge (

Re: Questions regarding control flow during IPA passes

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 6:04 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > At IPA time I'm creating GIMPLE statements. I've noticed during dumps > that gotos and labels don't seem to exist. In fact when I tried > introducing them, at least the gotos, failed. I assume that at this > point in compilation GCC re

Re: Local optimization options

On July 4, 2020 11:30:05 AM GMT+02:00, "Thomas König" wrote: >Hi, > >in Fortran, it would sometimes be useful to have a different >optimization >depending on whether we generate inlined code for intrinsics (where we >know when it is OK to „go wild“) or user code, where we need to >adhere (for ex

Re: Local optimization options

On July 5, 2020 12:37:58 PM GMT+02:00, "Thomas König" wrote: > >> Am 04.07.2020 um 19:11 schrieb Richard Biener >: >> >> On July 4, 2020 11:30:05 AM GMT+02:00, "Thomas König" > wrote: >>> >>> What could be a preferred way to achieve that? Could optimization >>> options like -ffast-math be appli

Re: Local optimization options

On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 4:37 PM Marc Glisse wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Jul 2020, Thomas König wrote: > > > > >> Am 04.07.2020 um 19:11 schrieb Richard Biener : > >> > >> On July 4, 2020 11:30:05 AM GMT+02:00, "Thomas König" > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> What could be a preferred way to achieve that? Could o

Re: documentation of powerpc64{,le}-linux-gnu as primary platform

On July 9, 2020 3:43:19 PM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote: >On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 9:07 AM Matthias Klose wrote: >> >> On 7/9/20 1:58 PM, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 7:03 AM Matthias Klose >wrote: >> >> >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-8/criteria.html lists t

Re: New x86-64 micro-architecture levels

On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 11:45 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 10:30 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > Most Linux distributions still compile against the original x86-64 > > baseline that was based on the AMD K8 (minus the 3DNow! parts, for Intel > > EM64T compatibility). > >

Re: New x86-64 micro-architecture levels

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 9:40 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Richard Biener: > > >> Looks good. I like it. > > > > Likewise. Btw, did you check that VIA family chips slot into Level A > > at least? > > Those seem to lack SSE4.2, so they land in the baseline. > > > Where do AMD bdverN slot in? > >

Re: RISC-V: `ld.so' fails linking against `libgcc.a' built at `-O0'

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 7:24 AM Andreas Schwab wrote: > > On Jul 14 2020, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > > Arguably this might probably be called a deficiency in libgcc, however > > the objects are built with `-fexceptions -fnon-call-exceptions' > > I consider that broken. It doesn't make any sens

Re: Understand pointer deferences in GIMPLE

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:17 AM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > I am trying to traverse the GIMPlE statements and identify all pointer > differences (i.e., memory load and store). For instance, something like: > > **_4* = 0; >... > _108 = (signed char *) _107; > _109 = **_108*;

Re: GCC Plugin to insert new expressions/statements in the code

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:23 PM Masoud Gholami wrote: > > Hi, > > I am writing a plugin that uses the PLUGIN_PRAGMAS event to register a > custom pragma that is expected to be before a function call as follows: > > int main() { > > char *filename = “path/to/file”; > #pragma inje

Re: Crash at gimple_code(gimple* )

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 9:30 AM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello, > > I am using the following code to iterate different gimple statements: > > ... > gimple* stmt = gsi_stmt(gsi); > if (gimple_assign_load_p(stmt)) { > tree rhs = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt); > if (!rhs) return; >

Re: Default defs question

On July 16, 2020 7:09:21 AM GMT+02:00, Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: >Regarding the other question I asked today could somebody explain to >me what the default_defs are all about. Default defs are SSA names without an explicit defining statement for example those representing values at function e

Re: New x86-64 micro-architecture levels

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:58 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > > * Dongsheng Song: > > > I fully agree these names (100/101, A/B/C/D) are not very intuitive, I > > recommend using isa tags by year (e.g. x64_2010, x64_2014) like the > > python's platform tags (e.g. manylinux2010, manylinux2014).

Re: Three issues

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:51 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Some background: > > This is in the dreaded structure reorganization optimization that I'm > working on. It's running at LTRANS time with '-flto-partition=one'. > > My issues in order of importance are: > > 1) In gimple-ssa.h, the equ

Re: New x86-64 micro-architecture levels

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:16 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Richard Biener: > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:58 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc > > wrote: > >> > >> * Dongsheng Song: > >> > >> > I fully agree these names (100/101, A/B/C/D) are not very intuitive, I > >> > recommend using isa tags by

Re: Three issues

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 5:32 AM Gary Oblock wrote: > > Richard, > > My wolf fence failed to detect an issue at the end of my pass > so I'm now hunting for a problem I caused in a following pass. > > Your thoughts? Sorry - I'd look at the IL after your pass for obvious mistakes. All default defs n

Re: Problems with changing the type of an ssa name

On July 25, 2020 7:30:48 AM GMT+02:00, Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: >If you've followed what I've been up to via my questions >on the mailing list, I finally traced my latest big problem >back to to my own code. In a nut shell here is what >I'm doing. > >I'm creating a new type exaactly like this:

Re: Problems with changing the type of an ssa name

On July 25, 2020 10:47:59 PM GMT+02:00, Gary Oblock wrote: >Richard, > >I suppose that might be doable but aren't there any ramifications >from the fact that the problematic ssa_names are the default defs? >I can imagine easily replacing all the ssa names except those that >are default defs. Wel

Re: TImode for BITS_PER_WORD=32 targets

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:38 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > Hi all, > > I want amdgcn to be able to support int128 types, partly because they > might come up in code offloaded from x86_64 code, and partly because > libgomp now requires at least some support (amdgcn builds have been > failing since ye

Re: Problems with changing the type of an ssa name

On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 10:31 PM Gary Oblock wrote: > > Richard, > > As you know I'm working on a structure reorganization optimization. > The particular one I'm working on is called instance interleaving. > For the particular case I'm working on now, there is a single array > of structures being

Re: Tar version being used

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:59 PM CHIGOT, CLEMENT via Gcc wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm wondering if someone knows which tar version / configuration was being > used when creating gcc-10.2.0 tarballs ? > > I'm getting some directory checksum errors while trying to unpack it with the > AIX tar (

Re: LTO Dead Field Elimination

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:43 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > This patchset brings back struct reorg to GCC. > > We’ve been working on improving cache utilization recently and would > like to share our current implementation to receive some feedback on it. > > Essentially, we’ve implemented the following

Re: LTO Dead Field Elimination

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 2:59 PM Christoph Müllner wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > On 7/27/20 2:36 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:43 PM Erick Ochoa > > wrote: > >> > >> This patchset brings back struct reorg to GCC. > >> > >> We’ve been working on improving cache utilization re

Re: Gcc Digest, Vol 5, Issue 52

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 4:36 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > Almost all of the makes sense to. > > I'm not sure what a conditionally initialized pointer is. { void *p; if (condition) p = ...; if (other condition) ... use p; will end up with a PHI node after the conditional init

Re: Gcc Digest, Vol 5, Issue 52

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 11:02 PM Gary Oblock wrote: > > Richard, > > I wasn't aware of release_defs so I'll add that for certain. > > When I do a single transformation as part of the transformation pass > each transformation uses the correct types internally but on the edges > emits glue code that

Re: Gcc Digest, Vol 5, Issue 52

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:39 PM Gary Oblock wrote: > > Richard, > > Thanks, I had no idea about the immediate uses mechanism and > using it will speed things up a bit and make them more reliable. > However, I'll still have to scan the LHS of each assignment unless > there's a mechanism to traverse

Re: Define __attribute__((no_instrument_function)) but still got instrumented

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 8:35 AM Shuai Wang via Gcc wrote: > > Hello! > > I am working on a ARM GCC plugin which instruments each GIMPLE function > with some new function calls. > > Currently I want to skip certain functions by adding the > no_instrument_function attribute. However, I do see that in

Re: Has FSF stopped processing copyright paperwork?

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:14 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc wrote: > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:42 PM Kaylee Blake wrote: > > > > On 2/5/20 11:49 pm, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:46 PM Kaylee Blake via Binutils > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On 19/3/20 12:02 pm, H.J. Lu wrote: > > >>> Kaylee, i

Re: Silly question about pass numbers

On August 13, 2020 2:57:04 AM GMT+02:00, Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: >Segher, > >If this was on the mainline and not in the middle of a >nontrivial optimization effort I would have filed a bug report >and not asked a silly question. 😉 > >I'm at a total lost as to how I could have caused the pass >

Re: RFC: -fno-share-inlines

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:36 AM Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > Following the previous discussion, this is a proposal for a patch that adds > the flag -fno-share-inlines that can be used when compiling singular source > files with a different set of flags than the rest of the project. > > It basi

Re: Problem cropping up in Value Range Propogation

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:15 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > I'm trying to debug a problem cropping up in value range propagation. > Ironically I probably own an original copy 1995 copy of the paper it's > based on but that's not going to be much help since I'm lost in the > weeds. It's running

Re: GCC Plugins and global_options

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: > > Hi! > > Any time somebody adds or removes an option in some *.opt file (which e.g. > on the 10 branch after branching off 11 happened 5 times already), many > offsets in global_options variable change. It is true we don't guarantee

Re: Question about IPA-PTA and build_alias

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 3:22 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm looking to understand better the points-to analysis (IPA-PTA) and > the alias analysis (build_alias). > > How is the information produced by IPA-PTA consumed? > > Are alias sets in build_alias computed by the intersections of th

Re: Peephole optimisation: isWhitespace()

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:09 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > "Allan Sandfeld Jensen" wrote: > > > On Freitag, 14. August 2020 18:43:12 CEST Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> Hi @ll, > >> > >> in his ACM queue article , > >> Matt Godbolt used the function > >> >

Re: Question about Gimple Variables named D.[0-9]*

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 11:51 AM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello, > > I am looking at the dump for the build_alias pass. I see a lot of > variables with the naming convention D.[0-9]* in the points-to sets > being printed. > > When I compile with > > -fdump-tree-all-all > > I can see that the suffix

Re: Peephole optimisation: isWhitespace()

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 1:22 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > "Richard Biener" wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:09 PM Stefan Kanthak > > wrote: > >> > >> "Allan Sandfeld Jensen" wrote: > >> > >> > On Freitag, 14. August 2020 18:43:12 CEST Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> >> Hi @ll, > >> >> > >> >>

Re: Do all global structure variables escape in IPA-PTA?

On August 25, 2020 3:09:13 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote: >Hi, > >I'm trying to understand how the escape analysis in IPA-PTA works. I >was >testing a hypothesis where if a structure contains an array of >characters and this array of characters is passed to fopen, the >structure and all subf

Re: Question about IPA-PTA and build_alias

On August 24, 2020 10:00:44 AM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote: > > >On 24/08/2020 09:40, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 3:22 PM Erick Ochoa >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm looking to understand better the points-to analysis (IPA-PTA) >and >>> the alias analysis (build_alias)

Re: Do all global structure variables escape in IPA-PTA?

On August 25, 2020 6:36:19 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote: > > >On 25/08/2020 17:19, Erick Ochoa wrote: >> >> >> On 25/08/2020 17:10, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On August 25, 2020 3:09:13 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa >>> wrote: Hi, I'm trying to understand how the escape analysis

Re: Do all global structure variables escape in IPA-PTA?

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:45 AM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > > On 26/08/2020 10:36, Erick Ochoa wrote: > > > > > > On 25/08/2020 22:03, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On August 25, 2020 6:36:19 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 25/08/2020 17:19, Erick Ochoa wrote: > >

Re: LTO slows down calculix by more than 10% on aarch64

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:34 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, > We're seeing a consistent regression >10% on calculix with -O2 -flto vs -O2 > on aarch64 in our validation CI. I tried to investigate this issue a > bit, and it seems the regression comes from inlining of orthonl into >

Re: Questions regarding update_stmt and release_ssa_name_fn.

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:32 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote: > > I'm having some major grief with a few related things that I'm try to > do. The mostly revolve around trying to change the type of an SSA name > (which I've given up in favor of creating new SSA names and replacing > the ones I wanted

Re: Questions regarding update_stmt and release_ssa_name_fn.

On August 27, 2020 7:45:15 PM GMT+02:00, Gary Oblock wrote: >Richard, > >>You need to call update_stmt () if you change SSA operands to >>sth else. > >I'm having trouble parsing the "sth else" above. Could you >please rephrase this if it's important to your point. I take >what you mean is if you

Re: Questions regarding update_stmt and release_ssa_name_fn.

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 6:29 AM Gary Oblock wrote: > > > If x_2 is a default def then the IL isn't correct in the first place. I > > doubt > > it is that way, btw. - we have verifiers that would blow up if it would. > > Richard, > > I'm just sharing this so you can tell me whether or not I'm goi

Re: LTO slows down calculix by more than 10% on aarch64

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 1:17 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:50, Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:34 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > We're seeing a consistent regression >10% on calculix with -O2 -flto vs > >

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >