Mikael Morin wrote:
Patch is basically OK. One comment below.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
index 436c160..3877711 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
@@ -3125,11 +3126,17 @@ resolve_function (gfc_expr *expr)
{
if (forall_fla
Hi Tobias,
I have attached an updated version, which actually implements do
concurrent in trans-stmt.c. Additionally, "CYCLE" without a label did
not work.
I think you also need to add support to frontend-passes.c.
Regards
Thomas
Hello Everyone,
This patch is for the Cilk Plus C++ compiler. It will allow users to
use _Cilk_spawn inside constructors and destructors.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
spawn_inside_ctor_dtor_patch
Description: spawn_inside_ctor_dtor_patch
Hello Everyone,
Local label inside a _Cilk_for was giving an error in the C++
Compiler of Cilk Plus GCC branch. This patch should fix that.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
label_patch
Description: label_patch
Apparently, if you don't call torture-finish, subsequent tests in dg.exp
inherit CFLAGS incorrectly. Serves me right for not testing the entire
testsuite when making changes to memmodel.exp. When will I learn to
expect the unexpected when making seemingly unrelated changes...?
Committed to b
> 2011-08-03 Benjamin Kosnik
> François Dumont
>
> * testsuite/23_containers/array/at_neg.cc: Move...
> * testsuite/23_containers/array/at.cc: ...here. Remove
> -fno-exceptions, call const at member function.
I've reverted the name change.
-benjamin
Ok.
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
On various targets we emit thunks into the same section as the corresponding
method they are thunking to.
Unfortunately, the thunk_fndecl had a DECL_COMDAT_GROUP set earlier to the
thunk name, which results in assembly like:
.section
.text._ZN1TI1WI1XEE1hEP
On Monday 05 September 2011 18:11:47 Tobias Burnus wrote:
> On 09/03/2011 02:49 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > This patch implements the parsing/diagnostic for "DO[,] CONCURRENT
> > for-all-header", e.g.
> >
> > do concurrent (i = 1:5)
> > A(i) = B(i)
> > end do
>
> (Side remark: do concurr
> I'll do another regtest with the updated patch (the changed error
> messages might need testsuite adaptions?) and then go ahead and commit
> it.
Committed as r178665 with some minor corrections.
Cheers,
Janus
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> This patch is for the Cilk Plus GCC branch. It should fix a bug in Cilk
> Plus runtime (libcilkrts) during initialization when the number of workers is
> greater than 3 times the number of cores in the system.
>
1. Pl
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> Fixed the changes you mentioned. Here is an upated patch.
>
I checked it into cilkplus branch.
--
H.J.
On 08/31/2011 09:56 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ /* So if we are parsing a friend template declaration, then
+we should make sure that looking up the name of the
+declaration doesn't schedule it for type access checking
+at the time of instantiation of t
Fixed the changes you mentioned. Here is an upated patch.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
From: H.J. Lu [hjl.to...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:26 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][cilkplus branch] Add __cil
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> This patch should add the built-in __cilk keyword and set it to 200 in the
> GCC cilkplus branch.
>
> Thanks,
>
+
+ if (flag_enable_cilk)
+cpp_define_formatted(pfile, "__cilk=%d", 200);
+ <<< Extra line
+2011-09-
Hi Tobias,
>> + if (s2&& !gfc_compare_interfaces (comp->ts.interface, s2, name,
>> 0, 1,
>> + err, sizeof(err)))
>
> Space after sizeof.
Fixed.
>> + gfc_error ("In derived type constructor at %L: Interface
>> mismatch"
>> +
This patch adds new tests for overload resolution. In contrast to
prior tests, we want these tests to have assembly differences because
PPH binds overloads at header compilation time, not based on accident
of include order. The test control files change as a consequence.
Changed the compiler com
Janus Weil wrote:
the attached patch fixes this accepts-valid OOP PR. It consists of two parts:
1) resolve_structure_cons is being extended to check the interface of
proc-ptr components (comment #7).
2) A small fix to allow for correct parsing of structure constructors
including proc-ptr componen
Hi!
On various targets we emit thunks into the same section as the corresponding
method they are thunking to.
Unfortunately, the thunk_fndecl had a DECL_COMDAT_GROUP set earlier to the
thunk name, which results in assembly like:
.section
.text._ZN1TI1WI1XEE1hEP1A,"axG",@progbits,_ZThn8_N1
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > 2011-09-07 Jakub Jelinek
>> >
>> > PR target/50310
>> > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_prepare_sse_fp_compare_args): For
>> > TARGET_AVX return code for LTGT and UNEQ.
>> > (ix86_expand_fp_vcond): Handle LTGT an
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 09:54:03PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > 2011-09-07 Jakub Jelinek
> >
> > PR target/50310
> > * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_prepare_sse_fp_compare_args): For
> > TARGET_AVX return code for LTGT and UNEQ.
> > (ix86_expand_fp_vcond): Handle LTGT and
Jason Merrill writes:
> On 09/07/2011 02:01 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> +
>> /* Process declarations and variables for C compiler.
>
> Blank line at the top of the file?
Oops, I noticed it and changed it in the aggregated patch I sent, but
forgot to update the diff against the previous. Sorr
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The attached testcase ICEs, because the vectorizer assumes that if vcond*
> is available, it supports all comparisons, not just a subset of them.
> With -mavx vcmpd etc. already support all the needed comparisons (and
> several more - we woul
Hi all,
the attached patch fixes this accepts-valid OOP PR. It consists of two parts:
1) resolve_structure_cons is being extended to check the interface of
proc-ptr components (comment #7).
2) A small fix to allow for correct parsing of structure constructors
including proc-ptr components (comment
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> This patch fixes a breakage introduced by the AVX2 changes.
> On the attached testcase even with -O3 -mavx -mno-avx2 we generate
> code that uses AVX2 insns. The immediate problem has been
> a thinko in what GET_MODE_SIZE returns - it is byt
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> This makes sure that we propagate comparisons that we cannot invert
> into inverted conditions by swapping edges or the conditional ops.
> For the testcase it transforms
>
> :
> D.2724_4 = xx_2(D) < xy_3(D);
> p_5 = (int) D.2724_4;
> D
On 09/07/11 10:28, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 2 September 2011 12:42, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 09/02/11 12:35, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>> On 1 September 2011 12:50, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Shrink-wrapping tests on ARM had one additional failure, which I could
track down to a s
On 09/01/2011 06:36 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
+
+/* Assertion macro to be used in line-map code. */
+#define linemap_assert(EXPR) \
+ do { \
+if (! (EXPR)) \
+ abort ();
Hi!
The attached testcase ICEs, because the vectorizer assumes that if vcond*
is available, it supports all comparisons, not just a subset of them.
With -mavx vcmpd etc. already support all the needed comparisons (and
several more - we wouldn't even need to swap the arguments), for SSE
the only mi
Hello Everyone,
This patch should add the built-in __cilk keyword and set it to 200 in the
GCC cilkplus branch.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
__cilk_keyword_patch
Description: __cilk_keyword_patch
Hi!
This patch fixes a breakage introduced by the AVX2 changes.
On the attached testcase even with -O3 -mavx -mno-avx2 we generate
code that uses AVX2 insns. The immediate problem has been
a thinko in what GET_MODE_SIZE returns - it is byte size instead of bit
size. But the following patch also
I am doing a merge from trunk and noticed the g++.dg/dg.exp are all
failing because we are trying to run the memmodel/ tests outside of the
memmodel/ directory. The memmodel tests must be excluded from the
dg.exp list, since they are handled specially.
Fixed thusly.
Applied to branch.
On 09/02/2011 10:38 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I wonder what would break if C++ just set TYPE_SIZE to the as-base size?
Good question. Probably argument passing, as the as-base size wouldn't
get a proper mode assigned form layout_type the
On 09/07/2011 02:01 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+
/* Process declarations and variables for C compiler.
Blank line at the top of the file?
Copyright (C) 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011
@@ -8
Jason Merrill writes:
> On 08/08/2011 03:52 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> + cfun->language = NULL;
>
> Might as well ggc_free it first.
Done.
>
>> + /* We want T to be either a type or a TYPE_DECL. */
>
> Comment is out of date.
Removed.
>
> Does __attribute ((used)) on the typedef prevent
> > It also upsets our careful use of an extension library to provide current
> > GCC facilities to Darwin 8...11 (which relies on the two-level namespace
> > to use both the system and GCC versions of libgcc_s) ... and, in
> > particular, this can cause subtle and difficult to diagnose differences
Hi,
Should not change behavior for comparing two files (expect for usage
output), and also should be POSIX compliant.
Tested on x86_64 tests logs and test directories, would be interested
in help testing on other platforms.
Ok to commit?
--
Quentin Neill
>From 4d4fa9d094745ace0b6e51faadb2f3ea
Hi,
the patch below should fix PR 50287 (and its many duplicates) by
simply never attempting to create new default-defs for unused
non-register parameters and using their DECL when calling the split
function. Note that all of this is relevant only in the case when
there is some other reason why w
On Sep 7, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Georg-Johann Lay schrieb:
>> This patch fixes magic number 4 and uses sizeof(int) instead so that the test
>> no more fails on int=16 platforms. Successfully tested on AVR.
>
> Ok to commit?
Ok.
OK.
Jason
Two little things I noticed while working on another issue:
1) We were passing tf_none to tsubst_template_argument even when we want
to explain a deduction failure.
2) We were calling tsubst_aggr_type and *then* checking whether it's a type.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commi
cp_parser_constant_expression wants an rvalue constant, so we shouldn't
use it for parsing initializers, since the thing being initialized might
be a reference. In C++98 it's OK because only integral statics can be
initialized in the class, but in C++11 any type can be with the
constexpr tag.
On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:08 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> It also upsets our careful use of an extension library to provide current GCC
> facilities to Darwin 8...11 (which relies on the two-level namespace to use
> both the system and GCC versions of libgcc_s) ... and, in particular, this
> can cause su
Georg-Johann Lay schrieb:
> This patch fixes magic number 4 and uses sizeof(int) instead so that the test
> no more fails on int=16 platforms. Successfully tested on AVR.
Ok to commit?
>
> Johann
>
> * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48571-1.c (bar): Use offsets sizeof(int)
> instead of 4.
>
>
Since r176262 read-only data on avr is put into .rodata and thus xfail is no
more appropriate.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=178649
Johann
* gcc.dg/section1.c: Don't xfail for avr.
Index: gcc.dg/section1.c
On Sep 7, 2011, at 4:30 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> I found myself building a lot of X's and native X's recently - linux ->
> darwin; i686-darwin -> ppc-darwin ; i686-darwin9 -> x86_64-darwin10.
> ok for trunk (after a re-check)?
Ok. I like cross building...
On 09/07/2011 06:41 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/07/2011 06:37 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I have the below simple patch to avoid the ICE after error. Tested
x86_64-linux. Is it Ok? In case, if it applies as-is, 4_6-branch too?
I think this is a recoverable error; if the exception-specification i
On Sep 7, 2011, at 12:22 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> OK for trunk ( + 4.6 after a re-check and with a suitable variant of
> system-darwin-ppc64.ads )?
Ok.
This patch fixes magic number 4 and uses sizeof(int) instead so that the test
no more fails on int=16 platforms. Successfully tested on AVR.
Johann
* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48571-1.c (bar): Use offsets sizeof(int)
instead of 4.
Index: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr48571-1.c
===
On 09/07/2011 06:37 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I have the below simple patch to avoid the ICE after error. Tested
x86_64-linux. Is it Ok? In case, if it applies as-is, 4_6-branch too?
I think this is a recoverable error; if the exception-specification is
ill-formed, let's pretend there wasn't on
Committed this patch as requested by Tom de Vries:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=178646
Johann
PR tree-optimization/50322
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopts-lt.c: Add xfails for avr.
Index: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopts-lt.c
Hi Jeff, Hi Alex,
I have finally tracked down a bug in the MN10300 backend which has
been causing all kinds of weird behaviour in generated code. The
problem was that the pattern to split an AND insn into two shift insns
was using a left shift followed by a right shift to clear bits at th
On 09/06/11 12:37, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Maybe here:
[...]
> it would be better to use:
>
> this_info = (struct bb_rename_info *) bb1->aux;
>
> if (this_info == NULL)
> continue;
>
> so that we don't care which order the rename_info array is. You could
> then keep the original f
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> In practice the patch will do something about alloca at most,
> unless, of course, you have a memleak that you don't use ;)
I think we have "alloca (0);" being required still and aligning the stack.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
Testing with the shrink-wrapping patch added reveals a problem with the
mips16 "save" insn: sometimes we store registers that shouldn't be
considered saved registers; we have to clear RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P for
these. Testing in progress with mips-elf, "ips16/arch=mips32r2/abi=32"
and some other multi
Hi,
I forgot to add -fstrict-enums flag totestsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr49911.C.
Committed as obvious.
Thanks,
Martin
Here the error when gcc compiles libitm:
../../../transactional-memory/libitm/aatree.h: In constructor
‘GTM::aa_node_base::aa_node_base(GTM::aa_node_base::level_type)’:
../../../transactional-memory/libitm/aatree.h:53:16: error:
list-initializer for non-class type must not be parenthesized [-We
On 01/09/11 16:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 1) shift by 0 is well defined (though not sure if arm backend
>supports it)
The canonical form of
( (x) (const_int 0))
is just
(x)
So while it's well defined, it's also useless.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:34 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> Zeroing out would hide bugs; there's lots of code that does
>
> delete ptr;
> ...
> if (ptr)
> {
> ptr->...
> }
>
> You'd not see the bug that way. Making 'delete v' clobber the pointer
> with 0xdeadbeef or ~0 instead would be better.
Rig
This looks like it has the same issue with maybe needing to use
TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT in type comparisons as the shuffle patch.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011, Artem Shinkarov wrote:
> > No. ?You need to fold it (c_fully_fold) to eliminate any
> > C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR it contains, but you shouldn't need to wrap the result
> > of folding in a SAVE_EXPR.
>
> Ok, Now I get it, thanks.
>
> In the attachment there is a new version of the p
On 5 September 2011 18:07, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 01/09/11 17:21, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>>
>> I wasn't sure how to find the mode of shift operand in the predicate
>> though, so I've assumed they're always the same size. How would one find
>> the proper mode in a predicate?
>
> OK, no reply, so I
This fixes the easy piece of PR19831 - removal of "dead" calls
to allocation functions (thus, memleaks). It looks like this
should be valid even for corner-cases like
errno = 0;
malloc (whatever);
if (errno != 0)
...;
as there is no standard defined value for whatever that is guaranteed
t
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 10:08:29AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > the patch below makes SRA produce intere type replacements when it
> > currently produces enumeration type ones because this then may cause
> > VRP to assume wrong bounds (PR 49911)
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 21:44, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> This patches fixes bugs that caused the multi-version tests to fail.
>
> * mversn-dispatch.c (specialize_call): Rebuild cgraph edges after
> specialization.
> (clone_and_dispatch_function): Rebuild cgraph edges to compute
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Artem Shinkarov
> wrote:
>> Here is a new version of the patch which considers the changes from
>> 2011-09-02 Richard Guenther
>>
>>
>> ChangeLog
>>
>> 20011-09-06 Artjoms Sinkarovs
>>
>> gcc/
>>
This fixes if-conversion to properly track inversion in its
(topmost) predicate. Spurious gimplification made this code
never work (it doesn't work at least on the 4.6 branch either).
Bootstrap and regtest ongoing on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2011-09-07 Richard Guenther
PR
Hello,
> >
> > Hm, the testcase looks like it should actually pass even for strict-
> align
> > targets. Martin?
> >
>
> Well, tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p clearly does not really work very
> well and needs a more-or-less reimplementation, there has been a
> discussion about this already in Augus
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:28:30PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Question for Richard H.: What is this actually good for, other than
> presenting consistent information to dwarf2cfi? Do we actually expect
> code to unwind through the middle of an epilogue?
With -fasynchronous-unwind-tables and e.g
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 11:35:53AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The SRA optimization requires the reference to struct/union member must be
> > aligned to their natural boundary e.g. (int *) must be aligned to 4 byte
> > b
This makes sure that we propagate comparisons that we cannot invert
into inverted conditions by swapping edges or the conditional ops.
For the testcase it transforms
:
D.2724_4 = xx_2(D) < xy_3(D);
p_5 = (int) D.2724_4;
D.2725_6 = p_5 == 0;
np_7 = (int) D.2725_6;
if (np_7 != 0)
to
:
On Wed, 7 Sep 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> With async signals we can at least get interrupted in the middle of an
> epilogue. What you are allowed to do here (throw an exception?
> perform manual unwinding? use gdb which unwinds?) is another
> question. ISTR customer requests for this feature
I found myself building a lot of X's and native X's recently - linux -
> darwin; i686-darwin -> ppc-darwin ; i686-darwin9 -> x86_64-darwin10.
Amongst other issues (primarily wrong auto-host.h decisions) there is
an issue that the target headers (and some GCC code) make use of
__ENVIRONMENT_M
This fixes PR50213 by adding a heuristic to tree forwprop to not
propagate simple IV counter increments (similar as how to DOM
avoids to CSE them).
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2011-09-07 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/50213
*
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Here's a new version, which adds support for mips16 and tries to avoid
> the window with the frame pointer restore.
>
> Testing mips16 is problematic, all the execute tests fail before and
> after - I interpret one of your earlier mails to sa
On 02/09/11 16:01, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> CC_NCV rightly only allows GE(U) and LT(U). GT(U) and LE(U) have to
> implemented by reversing the condition. This is handled correctly when
> the condition is first expanded, but nothing stops later optimisers from
> producing invalid forms.
>
> Thi
Hi,
I have the below simple patch to avoid the ICE after error. Tested
x86_64-linux. Is it Ok? In case, if it applies as-is, 4_6-branch too?
Thanks,
Paolo.
/cp
2011-09-07 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/50309
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Check u.function.exception_spec
Here's a new version, which adds support for mips16 and tries to avoid
the window with the frame pointer restore.
Testing mips16 is problematic, all the execute tests fail before and
after - I interpret one of your earlier mails to say that this is
expected. There are no new compilation failures w
Hello,
>
> Hm, the testcase looks like it should actually pass even for strict-
> align
> targets. Martin?
>
> Richard.
>
I debugged the GCC and observed the below situation. Here is the code
snippet of this case:
static int
__attribute__((noinline))
ox (struct bovid *cow)
{
cow->red = cow
Hello,
The patch repairs a problem when we attempt to substitute an insn like
(... (cmp (mem (reg:DI ax)) (reg:SI ax))) (note different modes) through
(set (reg:DI ax) (reg:DI dx)), which leaves the (reg:SI ax) part of the
comparison intact, causing an ICE later on when we notice that the dependen
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The SRA optimization requires the reference to struct/union member must be
> aligned to their natural boundary e.g. (int *) must be aligned to 4 byte
> boundary. This is done in function tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p. For target
> like x8
On Tuesday 06 September 2011 23:09:17, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 6 September 2011 22:58, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Wakely
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I don't mean for vector::begin and the other functions in that patch,
> >> I mean in general for member functio
> This doesn't actually make any functional change to x86 darwin, but it does
> group all the darwin versions together.
>
> Current PPC darwin (like x86) should use the GCC unwinder.
>
> (no Ada regression on *-darwin9, x86-64-darwin10)
>
> OK for trunk/ 4.6 when the PPC changes are in?
> cheers
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:11:26AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> Consequently, Mike's change to split rtl for
> indirect calls sometimes sees the scheduler moving the r2 load in the
> indirect call sequence before a toc reference.
Actually, this isn't correct. Mike's change adding rs6000.c
rs6000_ca
This doesn't actually make any functional change to x86 darwin, but it
does group all the darwin versions together.
Current PPC darwin (like x86) should use the GCC unwinder.
(no Ada regression on *-darwin9, x86-64-darwin10)
OK for trunk/ 4.6 when the PPC changes are in?
cheers
Iain
ada:
On 2 September 2011 12:42, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 09/02/11 12:35, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> On 1 September 2011 12:50, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>>> Shrink-wrapping tests on ARM had one additional failure, which I could
>>> track down to a stmfd instruction being emitted where an stmhifd was
>
>
> My patch has now survived a Thumb-2 bootstrap, and it sounds like Ramana
> has also successfully bootstrapped your original patch.
I'd rather take the version that handles the cases for the dominance
modes as well. RichardE, do you think you could have a look at this
one ?
cheers
Ramana
The "-flat_namespace" linker flag defeats one of Darwin's nicer
features (two-level library namespaces).
AFAIU, it was habitually applied to unix projects in the early
versions of darwin to cater for assumptions about library ordering
made in such projects.
However, it is rarely needed th
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the patch below makes SRA produce intere type replacements when it
> currently produces enumeration type ones because this then may cause
> VRP to assume wrong bounds (PR 49911).
>
> I do not know how to create a testcase for the PR this should
Hello,
The SRA optimization requires the reference to struct/union member must be
aligned to their natural boundary e.g. (int *) must be aligned to 4 byte
boundary. This is done in function tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p. For target
like x86 that define "STRICT_ALIGNMENT" to 0, the function return fa
> OK for trunk ( + 4.6 after a re-check and with a suitable variant of
> system-darwin-ppc64.ads )?
Yes, this looks fine as far as I'm concerned, thanks.
--
Eric Botcazou
Hi Eric,
On 6 Sep 2011, at 17:17, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 6, 2011, at 1:12 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
That's a good question, and one that I haven't got to the bottom
of -
but the exclusion was there in the original code-base [still in the
vendor's tree too].
(also, the rs6000 pro/epilogue co
91 matches
Mail list logo
