Re: [PATCH] fixincludes/Makefile for Interix Rev 3

2011-06-07 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 06/08/2011 08:02 AM, Douglas B Rupp wrote: Reformulated as per your suggestion, and retested. OK to commit? Yes, thanks! Paolo

Re: [Patch, Fortran] (Coarray) Add parse support for LOCK/UNLOCK (part 1 of 2)

2011-06-07 Thread Tobias Burnus
Dear Daniel, thank you for the review. Daniel Kraft wrote: + fputs ("lock-variable=", dumpfile); + if (c->expr1 != NULL) + show_expr (c->expr1); Why do you dump "lock-variable=" in any case, while you only print the names for the other arguments only if present? The lock vari

[PATCH] fixincludes/Makefile for Interix Rev 3

2011-06-07 Thread Douglas B Rupp
Reformulated as per your suggestion, and retested. OK to commit? --Douglas Rupp 2011-06-07 Douglas B Rupp * fixincludes/configure.ac (AC_USE_SYSTEM_EXTENSIONS): Add. * fixincludes/configure: Regenerate. * fixincludes/config.h.in: Regenerate. --- gcc.orig/fixinclude

[patch committed] [SH] Allow non-pic local and global dynamic tls models

2011-06-07 Thread Kaz Kojima
Hi, The attached patch allows SH target to use local and global dynamic tls models without -fpic/-fpie. Tested on sh4-unknown-linux-gnu with no new failures. Applied on trunk. Regards, kaz -- 2011-06-08 Kaz Kojima * config/sh/sh.c (prepare_move_operands): Set pic register

libobjc: updated some comments

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
Committed to trunk. Thanks Index: objc-private/selector.h === --- objc-private/selector.h (revision 174789) +++ objc-private/selector.h (working copy) @@ -28,16 +28,15 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respect /*

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
On 06/07/2011 06:25 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jun 7, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Janis Johnson wrote: >> On 06/07/2011 02:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: >>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Janis Johnson wrote: >>> Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which causes compiler warnings or

[google] Patch to add compiler flag to dump callgraph edge profiles in special .note sections (issue4591045)

2011-06-07 Thread Sriraman Tallam
Patch Description: = I am working on a project to do global function layout in the linker where the linker reads the callgraph edge profile information, generated by FDO, and uses that to find a ordering of functions that will place functions calling each other frequently closer

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM neon-fp16 tests for other -mcpu values

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
On 06/07/2011 06:29 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jun 7, 2011, at 6:06 PM, Janis Johnson wrote: >> These tests fail when multilib options use -mfpu= and override the >> -mfpu=neon-fp16 used for the test: > >> OK for trunk and 4.6 branch? > > Ok, but watch for comments from arm people. Yes, I'm

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM neon-fp16 tests for other -mcpu values

2011-06-07 Thread Mike Stump
On Jun 7, 2011, at 6:06 PM, Janis Johnson wrote: > These tests fail when multilib options use -mfpu= and override the > -mfpu=neon-fp16 used for the test: > OK for trunk and 4.6 branch? Ok, but watch for comments from arm people.

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Mike Stump
On Jun 7, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Janis Johnson wrote: > On 06/07/2011 02:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Janis Johnson wrote: >> >>> Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which >>> causes compiler warnings or errors when the multilib flags include >>> -mar

[testsuite] skip ARM neon-fp16 tests for other -mcpu values

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
These tests fail when multilib options use -mfpu= and override the -mfpu=neon-fp16 used for the test: g++.dg/ext/arm-fp16/arm-fp16-ops-5.C g++.dg/ext/arm-fp16/arm-fp16-ops-6.C gcc.dg/torture/arm-fp16-ops-5.c gcc.dg/torture/arm-fp16-ops-6.c gcc.target/arm/fp16-compile-vcvt.c The opti

[google] add module id in function header dump for lipo (issue4579046)

2011-06-07 Thread David Li
This is trivial change to allow module id to be displayed in LIPO mode in function header. 2011-06-07 David Li * tree-pretty-print.c (revision 174779) (dump_function_header): dump module id. Index: tree-pretty-print.c =

Re: [google] pessimize stack accounting during inlining

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
Ok for google/main. A good candidate patch for trunk too. Thanks, David On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Mark Heffernan wrote: > This patch pessimizes stack accounting during inlining.  This enables > setting a firm stack size limit (via parameters "large-stack-frame" and > "large-stack-frame-

[google] Pessimistic stack frame accounting during inlining

2011-06-07 Thread Mark Heffernan
This patch pessimizes stack accounting during inlining.  This enables setting a firm stack size limit (via parameters "large-stack-frame" and "large-stack-frame-growth").  Without this patch the inliner is overly optimistic about potential stack reuse resulting in actual stack frames much larger th

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
On 06/07/2011 02:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Janis Johnson wrote: > >> Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which >> causes compiler warnings or errors when the multilib flags include >> -march=. This patch causes those tests to be skipped.

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
It might be also useful to implement the dumping behavior like this: if any of the start/before/after/finish option is explicitly specified, IR (and only IR) will be dumped into files suffixed with .start/.before/.after/.finish. The debug dump will be dumped as usual into the non suffixed file name

[google] Test case cleanup after pass name change (issue4528128)

2011-06-07 Thread David Li
Fix lipo test cases with new pass names. 2011-06-07 David Li * testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/lipo/indir-call-prof_0.c: Pass name fix. * testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/lipo/indir-call-prof_1.c: Pass name fix. * testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/lipo/val-prof-1_0.c: Pass name fix.

[google] Backport r174536,174537,174762,174698 to google/main (issue4568059)

2011-06-07 Thread David Li
2011-06-07 David Li Backport trunk r174536,174537,174762,174698 Index: doc/invoke.texi === --- doc/invoke.texi (revision 174725) +++ doc/invoke.texi (working copy) @@ -5217,11 +5217,12 @@ appended with a sequential

libobjc: Remove unused code (patch 4)

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
Another cleanup patch. Committed to trunk. Thanks Index: sendmsg.c === --- sendmsg.c (revision 174766) +++ sendmsg.c (working copy) @@ -62,7 +62,9 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respect #define INVISIBLE_STRUCT_R

libobjc: Remove unused code (patch 3)

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
More of the same. Committed to trunk. Thanks Index: objc-private/module-abi-8.h === --- objc-private/module-abi-8.h (revision 174766) +++ objc-private/module-abi-8.h (working copy) @@ -277,12 +277,6 @@ struct objc_class { (cls

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
On 06/07/2011 02:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Janis Johnson wrote: > >> Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which >> causes compiler warnings or errors when the multilib flags include >> -march=. This patch causes those tests to be skipped.

Re: [pph] Stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node (issue4550121)

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 14:12, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gabriel Charette wrote: >> We need to stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node. > > That seems unlikely, as identifiers do not have a type. There is some > TREE_TYPE abuse in cp-tree.h, perhaps you should find out

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> That is -mx32 takes the same default as -m64. It is the correct >> behavior for -mx32. > > I think it's only right in the case where -m64 is the default, and the > specs for the case where -m32 is the

libobjc: Remove unused code (patch 2)

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
Removed more code in libobjc that is no longer used anywhere. Committed to trunk. Thanks Index: encoding.c === --- encoding.c (revision 174766) +++ encoding.c (working copy) @@ -993,22 +993,6 @@ method_getNumberOfArguments (struct

Re: RFA (diags): PATCH to allow %S in pp_verbatim in C++ front end

2011-06-07 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
Jason Merrill writes: | I want to add a %S format to the C++ front end for printing a | template/args pair during template argument deduction substitution. I | want to print this during print_instantiation_partial_context, which | uses pp_verbatim. But for some reason the format attribute on |

libobjc: remove unused code (patch 1)

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
This patch removes some obsolete code (which used to be used by the Traditional API) and that is no longer used anywhere. Committed to trunk. Thanks Index: class.c === --- class.c (revision 174766) +++ class.c (working copy

Re: [pph] Stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node (issue4550121)

2011-06-07 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gabriel Charette wrote: > We need to stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node. That seems unlikely, as identifiers do not have a type. There is some TREE_TYPE abuse in cp-tree.h, perhaps you should find out what you're streaming. Why are you not using accessor macros

Re: [testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Janis Johnson wrote: > Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which > causes compiler warnings or errors when the multilib flags include > -march=. This patch causes those tests to be skipped. It also > prevents gcc.target/arm/20090811-1.c from ru

[testsuite] skip ARM tests with conflicting options

2011-06-07 Thread Janis Johnson
Several tests in gcc.target/arm use dg-options with -mcpu=, which causes compiler warnings or errors when the multilib flags include -march=. This patch causes those tests to be skipped. It also prevents gcc.target/arm/20090811-1.c from running with multilibs that would override -mcpu or

Re: [patch] Improve detection of widening multiplication in the vectorizer

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Ira Rosen wrote: > Hi, > > The vectorizer expects widening multiplication pattern to be: > >     type a_t, b_t; >     TYPE a_T, b_T, prod_T; > >     a_T = (TYPE) a_t; >     b_T = (TYPE) b_t; >     prod_T = a_T * b_T; > > where type 'TYPE' is double the size of type

Re: objc/objc++: fix most testsuite failures on darwin8

2011-06-07 Thread Mike Stump
On Jun 7, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Nicola Pero wrote: > This patch (written with Iain) fixes all the testsuite failiures on Darwin8. > It includes the previous one. > > OK to commit ? Ok.

Re: objc/objc++: fix most testsuite failures on darwin8

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
This patch (written with Iain) fixes all the testsuite failiures on Darwin8. It includes the previous one. OK to commit ? Thanks Index: ChangeLog === --- ChangeLog (revision 174760) +++ ChangeLog (working copy) @@ -1,3 +1,18 @

Re: Initialize INSN_COND

2011-06-07 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 06/07/2011 07:39 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > > On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > Ok. Although I wonder how sel-sched can end up reusing an entry in h_d_i_d? > > Unlike Haifa scheduler, we recompute INSN_LUIDs for each region. However, we > call sched_deps_{init,finis

Re: -fdump-passes -fenable-xxx=func_name_list

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
The dump-pass patch with test case. David On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > Please review the attached two patches. > > In the first patch, gate functions are cleaned up. All the per > function legality checks are moved into the executor and the > optimization heuristic

objc/objc++: fix most testsuite failures on darwin8

2011-06-07 Thread Nicola Pero
This patch (prepared by me and Iain) fixes almost all failures of the testsuite on Darwin 8 caused by the large testsuite changes I committed yesterday. The patch fixes all the failures but 2. These two require a different small fix that is being developed/tested and will be submitted separatel

[x32] PATCH: Use @option{} on -mx32, -m64 and -mx32

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
Hi, I checked this patch into x32 branch. H.J. --- commit e8fa82850eaa92e660e06d4a939a0cc313b5aa3e Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Jun 7 11:44:34 2011 -0700 Use @option{} on -mx32, -m64 and -mx32. diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog.x32 b/gcc/ChangeLog.x32 index 3ce5fa1..5655c61 100644 --- a/gcc/Change

[x32] PATCH: Document --enable-ia32 and --enable-x32

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
Hi, I checked this patch into x32 branch. H.J. commit d41e1fd1c4d8114532152647e5fc5b6bc3bce5dd Author: H.J. Lu Date: Tue Jun 7 11:39:27 2011 -0700 Document --enable-ia32 and --enable-x32. diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog.x32 b/gcc/ChangeLog.x32 index 06d931a..3ce5fa1 100644 --- a/gcc/ChangeLog

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > That is -mx32 takes the same default as -m64. It is the correct > behavior for -mx32. I think it's only right in the case where -m64 is the default, and the specs for the case where -m32 is the default need changing to handle -mx32 properly. -- Joseph S. M

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > I thought about it when I started working on it. But I couldn't find a way > to do it properly. What we have are > > #if TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT > #define SPEC_32 "m32" > #define SPEC_64 "!m32" > #else > #define SPEC_32 "!m64" > #define SPEC_64 "m64" > #endif >

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > > So my view is that you should define __LIBGCC_TRAMPOLINE_SIZE__, only if > > -fbuilding-libgcc. > > I can give it a try if I can figure out how to define -fbuilding-libgcc > via the option handling machinery. I just want to avoid having to That should

Re: [build] Remove LIB2ADDEHDEP

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > Right, my plan was to move all files only referenced by LIB2ADDEH*. > > Does the plan seem ok otherwise? Yes, it seems plausible. Thanks for working on this transition. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
32 --with-arch-32=atom --with-cpu-64=corei7 --enable-cloog-backend=isl --with-ppl-include=/opt/gnu/include --with-ppl-lib=/opt/gnu/lib64 --with-cloog-include=/opt/gnu/include --with-cloog-lib=/opt/gnu/lib64 --with-fpmath=sse Thread model: posix gcc version 4.7.0 20110607 (experimen

Re: -fdump-passes -fenable-xxx=func_name_list

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
Please review the attached two patches. In the first patch, gate functions are cleaned up. All the per function legality checks are moved into the executor and the optimization heuristic checks (optimize for size) remain in the gators. These allow the the following overriding order: common fl

Re: Initialize INSN_COND

2011-06-07 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Gary Funck wrote: > On 06/07/11 21:39:57, Alexander Monakov wrote: >> 2011-06-07  Alexander Monakov   >> >>       * sel-sched.c (move_op): Use correct type for 'res'.  Verify that >>       code_motion_path_driver returned 0 or 1. >>       (sel_region_finish): Clear

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>       * config.gcc: Support --enable-x32/--enable-ia32 for x86 Linux >>       targets. >> >>       * configure.ac: Support --enable-x32/--enable-ia32. >>       * configure: Regenerated. > > New configu

[pph] Stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node (issue4550121)

2011-06-07 Thread Gabriel Charette
We need to stream TREE_TYPE for identifier node. This fixes some ICEs, but introduces some new assembly mismatch errors. Here is the testing diff: 47,49d46 < XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1autometh.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for bogus messages, line ) < XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1autometh.cc -fpph-map=pph.

Re: [pph] Clean up PPH tests (issue4572042)

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
After getting new failures due to an unrelated fix, I think this will be more trouble than it's worth. First, we can't get rid of the XPASSes, so those will always be noisy. Second, some XPASSes will need to be unmarked because we just fixed the underlying problem. Third, we are at such an early

Re: [pph] Removing pth implementation from pph implementation (issue4571047)

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 16:12, Gabriel Charette wrote: > Ok removed the tests as well. > > Executed the full test suite with no errors (except for currently known > ones..) Thanks. Committed as rev 174761. Diego.

Re: Initialize INSN_COND

2011-06-07 Thread Gary Funck
On 06/07/11 21:39:57, Alexander Monakov wrote: > 2011-06-07 Alexander Monakov > > * sel-sched.c (move_op): Use correct type for 'res'. Verify that > code_motion_path_driver returned 0 or 1. > (sel_region_finish): Clear h_d_i_d. Alexander, will this patch fix the recently rep

Re: Initialize INSN_COND

2011-06-07 Thread Alexander Monakov
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > >> Ok. Although I wonder how sel-sched can end up reusing an entry in > >> h_d_i_d? Unlike Haifa scheduler, we recompute INSN_LUIDs for each region. However, we call sched_deps_{init,finish} once per function (like Haifa) and that makes us reuse entri

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:06, Xinliang David Li wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Diego Novillo wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote: >>> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and >>> after is not enough. How about >>> >>> start, bef

Re: Ping: Re: Improve DSE in the presence of calls

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Easwaran Raman wrote: > Ping. > > Diego, David, >  Is this patch OK for google/main? Yes -- but I would like to see it in trunk too if possible -- both llvm and icc do very good job in these cases. Thanks, David > > -Easwaran > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:48 PM,

Re: Ping: Re: Improve DSE in the presence of calls

2011-06-07 Thread Easwaran Raman
Ping. Diego, David, Is this patch OK for google/main? -Easwaran On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote: > Ping. > > On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Easwaran Raman wrote: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00781.html >> >

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote: >> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and >> after is not enough. How about >> >> start, before, after, and finish? >> >> I.e. >> >> -fdump-tree-pre-start

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote: > Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and > after is not enough. How about > > start, before, after, and finish? > > I.e. > > -fdump-tree-pre-start --> dump IR before TODO_start of PRE pass > -fdump-tree-pre-befor

Re: [testsuite] Run TLS torture tests with -fpic etc.

2011-06-07 Thread Rainer Orth
Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 06:48:08PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: >> any word on this patch? I think I only need approval for the gcc.c > > I'm not a maintainer of gcc.c, and I think it is a bad idea. > PIE is just a (slightly) more secure form of an executable, therefore > i

Re: [testsuite] Run TLS torture tests with -fpic etc.

2011-06-07 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 06:48:08PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: > any word on this patch? I think I only need approval for the gcc.c I'm not a maintainer of gcc.c, and I think it is a bad idea. PIE is just a (slightly) more secure form of an executable, therefore if a target doesn't support positio

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and after is not enough. How about start, before, after, and finish? I.e. -fdump-tree-pre-start --> dump IR before TODO_start of PRE pass -fdump-tree-pre-before --> dump IR just before PRE after its TODO start finishes -fdump-tree

Re: [testsuite] Run TLS torture tests with -fpic etc.

2011-06-07 Thread Rainer Orth
Jakub, any word on this patch? I think I only need approval for the gcc.c part. Thanks. Rainer Rainer Orth writes: > Jakub Jelinek writes: > >> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 09:38:31PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: >>> Rainer Orth writes: >>> Jakub, any suggestion how to properly test for -

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 02:36, Richard Guenther wrote: >> For one thing, you need to either remember what is the previous pass, >> or dump all passes which for large files can take very long time. Even >> with all the dumps, you will need to eyeballing to find the previous >> pass which may or may

Re: -fdump-passes -fenable-xxx=func_name_list

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
Ok -- that sounds good. David On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Richard Guenther >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Xinliang David Li >>> wrote: This is the ver

[PATCH] Better propagation of flags in access trees of SRA

2011-06-07 Thread Martin Jambor
Hi, the way we propagate flags in SRA access tree has evolved in an unfortunate way, this patch simplifies the whole thing while doing exactly the same thing. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux, OK for trunk? Thanks, Martin 2011-06-06 Martin Jambor * tree-sra.c (mark_rw_stat

Re: Dump before flag

2011-06-07 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >>> >>> Your patch doesn't really improve this but adds to the confusion. >>> >>> +  /* Override dump TODOs.  */ >>> +  if (dump_file && (pass->todo_flags_finish & TODO_dump_func) >>

[v3] Use move_if_noexcept in std::vector

2011-06-07 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, the below starts using it, for correctness wrt move constructors which can throw. For sure we are missing the optimization which uses the default-constructor + swap when the type isn't nothrow move constructible, per Note 5 in n3050, for example. Tested x86_64-linux, committed. Paolo.

Re: Patch: aesthetics for gcc/cp/cxx-pretty-print.c

2011-06-07 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 06/06/2011 04:17 AM, Bruce Korb wrote: It also caused a code analysis tool to wander off into the weeds. And "x, break;" didn't? :) (First time I see it, I swear). Paolo

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
An additional comment on the specs: OPTION_DEFAULT_SPECS needs updating (-mx32 should use the --with-arch-64 etc. settings). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: PATCH [1/n]: Add initial -x32 support

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > * config.gcc: Support --enable-x32/--enable-ia32 for x86 Linux > targets. > > * configure.ac: Support --enable-x32/--enable-ia32. > * configure: Regenerated. New configure options need documenting in install.texi. > #undef ASM_SPEC >

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 06/07/2011 05:30 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > So my view is that you should define __LIBGCC_TRAMPOLINE_SIZE__, only if > -fbuilding-libgcc. I can give it a try if I can figure out how to define -fbuilding-libgcc via the option handling machinery. I just want to avoid having to implement too ma

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Rainer Orth
"Joseph S. Myers" writes: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> Paolo Bonzini writes: >> >> >> * Except for Darwin, the code uses TRAMPOLINE_SIZE. This only exists in >> >>the backend headers. While it could be duplicated somewhere in the >> >>libgcc configury, I'd rather prop

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > Paolo Bonzini writes: > > >> * Except for Darwin, the code uses TRAMPOLINE_SIZE. This only exists in > >>the backend headers. While it could be duplicated somewhere in the > >>libgcc configury, I'd rather propose that gcc define > >>__TRAMPO

Re: [build] Remove LIB2ADDEHDEP

2011-06-07 Thread Rainer Orth
"Joseph S. Myers" writes: > On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> * The gcc/unwind* files and gcc/emutls.c can move, too. > > And the other files listed in LIB2ADDEH for various targets, I expect. > > arm/libunwind.S > arm/pr-support.c > arm/unwind-arm.c > arm/unwind-arm.h > ia64/fde-vms.c

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/48780 (non-promotion of scoped enums)

2011-06-07 Thread Jason Merrill
A bug report on IRC pointed out that we were giving the -Wabi warning in cases that don't affect the ABI at all, namely use of scoped enums in switch. So this patch limits the warning to the varargs case by catching scoped enums in perform_integral_promotions so that only callers that use the

Re: [build] Remove LIB2ADDEHDEP

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Rainer Orth wrote: > * The gcc/unwind* files and gcc/emutls.c can move, too. And the other files listed in LIB2ADDEH for various targets, I expect. arm/libunwind.S arm/pr-support.c arm/unwind-arm.c arm/unwind-arm.h ia64/fde-vms.c ia64/unwind-ia64.c ia64/unwind-ia64.h rs6000/d

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Rainer Orth
"Joseph S. Myers" writes: > On Tue, 31 May 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> > I'd thought about it, but refrained since HAVE_ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK >> > affects only three cpus. Currently, our documentation of libgcc >> > configury and macros used is close to non-existant. That's probably for >> >

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Remaining FP moves cleanups

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:07 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> OTOH, you are right, this statement can be moved to case 6, without >>> the check for registers. >>> >> >> Like this?  OK for trunk with a ChangeLog entry? >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> H.J. >> -

Re: [Design notes, RFC] Address-lowering prototype design (PR46556)

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:14 PM, William J. Schmidt wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 12:06 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:07 PM, William J. Schmidt >> wrote: > > > >> >  * If the original expression will be recognized as a "hidden global >> > store" in >> >   tree-ssa

[PATCH] Remove set_sizetype

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
Now that there is a single place left to call set_sizetype we can remove it and initialize sizetypes properly from the start (in initialize_sizetypes). Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk. Richard. 2011-06-07 Richard Guenther * stor-layout.c (initia

Re: [Design notes, RFC] Address-lowering prototype design (PR46556)

2011-06-07 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 12:06 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:07 PM, William J. Schmidt > wrote: > > * If the original expression will be recognized as a "hidden global store" > > in > > tree-ssa-sink.c:is_hidden_global_store, but the replacement expression > > wil

Re: Remove separate tarballs

2011-06-07 Thread Andrew Haley
On 05/29/2011 02:07 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > The vast majority of users does not need the former and the latter is > on the verge of becoming practically irrelevant. As one datapoint, the > entire FreeBSD Ports Collection has a single(!) port relying on GCJ. It's not quite as irrelevant as

Re: Committed: fix PR49285, breakage building libgcc2 for MMIX

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Sandiford
Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > I needed a baseline for PR48542 (problems with setjmp/longjmp), but > building MMIX was broken on trunk. It was "bitten" by the fixups to > predicate matching done recentlish. The comment above the MMIX > truncdfsf2 expander complains about having to use an expander

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Jason Merrill
On 06/07/2011 10:05 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: In that case you could do what Jakub suggested - but only for rvalues of course. Right, and I need to handle lvalues as well. I'm not sure if we already avoid calling the folding where we require lvalues. No, we don't. Can't you instead adju

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Remaining FP moves cleanups

2011-06-07 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:07 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> OTOH, you are right, this statement can be moved to case 6, without >> the check for registers. >> > > Like this?  OK for trunk with a ChangeLog entry? > > Thanks. > > -- > H.J. > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Remaining FP moves cleanups

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> 2011-06-05  Uros Bizjak   >>> >>>        * config/i386/i386.md (*movdf_internal_rex64) : >>>        Remove MODE_TI handling.  Remove SSE1 handling in attribute "mode" >>>        calculation.

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 06/07/2011 06:19 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> I _think_ that you can unconditionally change the code to do >> >>   TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t1) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t2) >>   &&  TYPE_QUALS (t1) == TYPE_QUALS (t2) >> >> now, I'm not sure if

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Remaining FP moves cleanups

2011-06-07 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> 2011-06-05  Uros Bizjak   >> >>        * config/i386/i386.md (*movdf_internal_rex64) : >>        Remove MODE_TI handling.  Remove SSE1 handling in attribute "mode" >>        calculation. >>        (*movdf_internal_rex64) : Remove MODE_TI handling.

Re: [build] Move ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK to toplevel libgcc

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 31 May 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > I'd thought about it, but refrained since HAVE_ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK > > affects only three cpus. Currently, our documentation of libgcc > > configury and macros used is close to non-existant. That's probably for > > someone who has implemented this s

Commit: Add support for configuring for other V850 architectures

2011-06-07 Thread Nick Clifton
Hi Guys, I am applying the patch below to tidy up the V850 architecture selection in config.gcc and to add support for newer V850 architectures (eg V850e2v3). Cheers Nick gcc/ChangeLog 2011-06-07 Nick Clifton * config.gcc: Unify V850 architecture options and add support for

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Jason Merrill
On 06/07/2011 06:19 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: I _think_ that you can unconditionally change the code to do TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t1) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t2) && TYPE_QUALS (t1) == TYPE_QUALS (t2) now, I'm not sure if for the testcase T and unsigned differ in qualifiers. Do they? Hmm, I

Re: [4.6 PATCH] Workaround for stack slot sharing problems with unrolling (PR fortran/49103)

2011-06-07 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > +         tree base = get_base_address (lhs); > > Probably easier and more complete to do > > if (lhs && TREE_CODE (lhs) != SSA_NAME) > { > tree base = get_base_address (lhs); > > > I don't like the

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > > > fold_convert_loc it to the expected type, while the middle-end has > > > > the notion of useless type conversions, fold-const.c is also used by > > > > FEs and I think it is expected to have

Re: [lra] A new branch

2011-06-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > * doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_REGISTER_BANK): New hook. Please include the text of documentation for new hooks in target.def instead of tm.texi.in where possible (so tm.texi.in just has the @hook line) - that is, unless it's based on older GFDL-on

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > fold_convert_loc it to the expected type, while the middle-end has > > > the notion of useless type conversions, fold-const.c is also used by > > > FEs and I think it is expected to have the types exactly matching. > > > So (T)s1[10] instea

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Remaining FP moves cleanups

2011-06-07 Thread H.J. Lu
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > 2011-06-05  Uros Bizjak   > >        * config/i386/i386.md (*movdf_internal_rex64) : >        Remove MODE_TI handling.  Remove SSE1 handling in attribute "mode" >        calculation. >        (*movdf_internal_rex64) : Remove MODE_TI h

Re: [testsuite] Provide TLS access model testcases

2011-06-07 Thread Kaz Kojima
"Joseph S. Myers" wrote: >> gcc.dg/torture/tls/run-gd.c fails on SH because SH assumes >> -fpic for global and local dynamic tls models. Although a line > > That sounds like an SH target bug to me. Ok, I'd like to fix the SH backend so that those tests pass without -fpic/-fpie. Regards,

[PING] [PATCH][JAVA] Sanitize Java frontend global tree building

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > In preparation to move all frontends common tree node building to > the middle-end this makes the Java frontend actually use the > standard routines. It's still severely broken in overriding > things with stuff that does not match the targets C AB

Re: [ARM] TLS Descriptor support

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Earnshaw
On 06/07/11 07:11, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 06/06/11 17:27, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > >> Eh? This is backwards. There is blx , but no bl . If the assembler >> gets confused with 'bl r0' then it needs to be fixed urgently. > > Are you requiring the assembler be fixed before this patch can be com

[PATCH] Fix ICE in reset_unmarked_insns_debug_uses (PR middle-end/49308)

2011-06-07 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 10:27:51AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 6, 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > >> It might be too late for DF to do anything sensible to preserve the > >> debug info rather than just throw it away, as your partial approval > >> suggests. > > > OK, let me think about

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 12:19:59PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> > In the testcase, fold_indirect_ref_1 won't fold *(T*)(s1+10)

Re: [vta, graphite?] propagate degenerate phi nodes into debug stmts

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun  6, 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > >>> You meant 4.6 stage1, but I missed it.  How's it for 4.7 stage1? >>> Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu and i686-linux-gnu. > >> Isn't exactly ICEing for num_ssa_operands/delink_stmt_imm_use. > >

Re: RFA (fold): PATCH for c++/49290 (folding *(T*)(ar+10))

2011-06-07 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 12:19:59PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: >> > In the testcase, fold_indirect_ref_1 won't fold *(T*)(s1+10) to an >> > ARRAY_REF >> > because T != unsigned.  Ev

  1   2   >