Hi,
Some of the recently added vectorizer pattern detection functions
create pattern def stmts, and set vectype for these statements. This
causes an assert failure in vect_determine_vectorization_factor, since
we only expect data-refs and pattern statements themselves to have the
vectype set. This
I've been wondering why gen-vect-11{,c}.c were failing when running
the testsuite with a compiler defaulting to ultrasparc3 or later.
The problem is that now that we turn on VIS by default for those chips
we need to check this properly in the testsuite target support
predicates.
Luckily we have
On 11/08/2011 09:54 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (fn)) != LANG_TYPE)
You don't need to check this, since OVL_CURRENT always gives a function.
It seems like a lot of the complexity of lookup_literal_operator is for
dealing with string literals, which is the case
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 08:23:56PM +0200, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the attached patch changes the backtracing functionality, which is
> used to print a stack trace before aborting when something goes
> belly-up, to use the stack unwinding functionality provided by libgcc
> instead of using
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 07:23:03PM +0200, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's 2011. I think it's fairly safe to assume that, at this point, any
> target capable of supporting libgfortran also provides C89. Attached
> patch gets rid of such configure tests, and rips out unused code paths
> (which
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 10:16:27AM +0100, FX wrote:
> PR21881 is about cases like this:
>
> > type t
> > integer i001(268435456)
> > end type t
> > type(t), allocatable :: x(:)
>
>
> where (on 32-bit systems) the array in the derived type is too large for us
> to handle (the array des
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:33:56AM +0100, FX wrote:
> Attached patch adds a (rather trivial) simplification routine for the DREAL
> intrinsic (a GNU extension), which is the last unimplemented simplification
> for elemental intrinsics (PR 38718, which tracks this issue, also lists
> LSHIFT and R
Ping.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.trivialbugs.com
On 28/10/2011, at 9:01 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> Jan,
>
> Attached is the updated patch. The only major change is the addition of
> indirect_call_cost to size and time weights. I've set the size cost of
> indirect call to 3, which is what I re
> > (define_expand "umulqihi3"
> > [(set (match_operand:HI 0 "register_operand")
> > (mult:HI (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 1 "register_operand"))
> > (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 2 "register_operand"]
> > "0"
> > ""
> > )
>
> Just delete it?
No, we ac
OK.
Jason
OK.
Jason
On 11/08/2011 09:54 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
My idea was that if C++ explicitly does not use the fixed point suffixes
then, in C++11 mode, we should pass them along as user-defined literals.
I don't think so. Those suffixes are reserved to the implementation anyway.
I'll look at the patch
Ping...
Sorry I forgot to cc you.
I needed rebase anyhow after all the churn recently.
Also, I started a food fight with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-11/msg00124.html.
My idea was that if C++ explicitly does not use the fixed point suffixes
then, in C++11 mode, we should pass them along as us
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Delesley Hutchins wrote:
> This patch fixes a bug wherein the trylock attribute would not work if
> it was attached to a virtual method.
Diego, can you please review this?
Thanks,
Ollie
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Delesley Hutchins wrote:
>
> This patch adds support for array indexing (i.e. operator []) in lock
> expressions. The current version of gcc seems to emit these as
> expressions involving pointer arithmetic, so we update
> get_canonical_lock_expr() to handle such
On 11/07/2011 12:28 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
PING!
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 20:57, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
Hi,
here's an updated version of my patch that gets rid of _commit along
with a section in the manual describing data consistency and
durability issues.
See also the thread starting at
This adds C++11 allocator support to vector in debug mode and profile
mode. It also fixes an unrelated bug in
__profile::vector::push_back(_Tp&&)
* include/bits/stl_vector.h (vector::_Alloc_traits): Make private.
* include/debug/vector: Add allocator-extended constructors, ensure
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 12:57:29AM +0100, FX wrote:
> >> -- 50404: refuse to have a CLOSE statement without a UNIT
> >> (F2008's C908 "A file-unit-number shall be specified in a
> >> close-spec-list") (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50404)
> >
> > jerry already approved this one.
>
>
>> -- 50404: refuse to have a CLOSE statement without a UNIT
>> (F2008's C908 "A file-unit-number shall be specified in a
>> close-spec-list") (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50404)
>
> jerry already approved this one.
And I committed it as rev. , with a slight modification to add a
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:43:14PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I checked in the generic portion of Dmitry Plotnikov's patch
> to the vectorizer and optabs that enables this patch. The ARM
> portion of his patch is still outstanding, awaiting approval.
>
> This allows this target hook to be
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 12:13:10AM +0100, FX wrote:
> PRs 50540 and 50404 each contain a short patch, written by Steve.
> Both patches are straightforward:
>
> -- 50404: refuse to have a CLOSE statement without a UNIT
> (F2008's C908 "A file-unit-number shall be specified in a
> close-spec-list")
PRs 50540 and 50404 each contain a short patch, written by Steve. Both patches
are straightforward:
-- 50404: refuse to have a CLOSE statement without a UNIT (F2008's C908 "A
file-unit-number shall be specified in a close-spec-list")
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50404)
-- 50
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:46:14PM +0100, FX wrote:
> Substrings can't have length of less than zero (i.e. negative length). For
> example, "foo"(:-1) is the same as "foo"(:0) and "foo"(2:1); all are
> zero-length strings. The patch for PR 48876 fixed part of an issue of
> substring simplificati
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:43:14PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I checked in the generic portion of Dmitry Plotnikov's patch
> to the vectorizer and optabs that enables this patch. The ARM
> portion of his patch is still outstanding, awaiting approval.
>
> This allows this target hook to be
Substrings can't have length of less than zero (i.e. negative length). For
example, "foo"(:-1) is the same as "foo"(:0) and "foo"(2:1); all are
zero-length strings. The patch for PR 48876 fixed part of an issue of substring
simplification, making sure the endpoint of the substring is never less
On 11/08/2011 02:08 PM, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> - change the match for g to _ITM_RU[48]
Change the match to [248].
r~
On 11/08/2011 04:29 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/08/2011 12:21 PM, Patrick Marlier wrote:
The other way could be to change the regex but we don't want that.
Why not?
My guess was that the purpose to have "long" in the testcase was to test
the generation of another TM-builtin than _ITM
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:22:11PM -1100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> Working virtually out of Pago Pago for now.
>>
>> The following patch enables mixed mode COND_EXPR vectorization, similarly
>> how it has been enabled for i?86/x86_
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:22:11PM -1100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Working virtually out of Pago Pago for now.
>
> The following patch enables mixed mode COND_EXPR vectorization, similarly
> how it has been enabled for i?86/x86_64 a few months ago.
> For Altivec/VSX the only combinations th
Dear Paul,
Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
I am asking the question :-) Are the two equivalent? To my mind, it
is a matter of taste, if they are.
I think in practice they are the same. A derived-type entity with
parameter attribute ends up as static variable with TREE_READONLY. Thus,
within the
On 11/07/2011 07:28 PM, Quentin Neill wrote:
> + Add FMA4 to bdver2.
> + * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal): Add FMA4
> to bdver2.
Ok.
r~
Err, this is the proper patch, sorry.
From: Dodji Seketeli
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 17:21:52 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] PR c++/51027 - accepts alias-declaration without ';'
gcc/cp/
* parser.c (cp_parser_alias_declaration): Require ';' at the end
of the declaration.
libstdc++-v3/
On 8 Nov 2011, at 21:29, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/08/2011 01:20 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
is it expected for libitm to work on x86 darwin?
Yes.
OK, I'll persevere ;-)
Iain
On 11/08/2011 12:21 PM, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> The other way could be to change the regex but we don't want that.
Why not?
r~
Hello,
Member alias templates don't have the DECL_IGNORED_P property set to 1
so that the debug info backend doesn't ignore it. I didn't notice
that on my DWARF enabled platform because the dwarf backend ignores
DECLs it doesn't know about. The stabs backend is not that forgiving.
I noticed tha
On 11/08/2011 01:20 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> is it expected for libitm to work on x86 darwin?
Yes.
> /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile
> -B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/bin/
> -B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
> /GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwi
On 11/07/2011 03:28 PM, Walter Lee wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02084.html
TileGx:
Almost all the same comments as for TilePro.
I see that you've started some macroization of the port, but havn't completed
it. E.g. sub3 vs addsi3+adddi3.
> (define_expand "addsf3"
Cle
Hi Chaps
On 8 Nov 2011, at 18:22, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/08/2011 09:56 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 17:31:45, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/08/2011 09:26 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 16:33:52, Richard Henderson wrote:
toplevel/
Hello,
G++ is accepting alias-declaration missing semicolon at the end.
Oops. Fixed thus.
I had to update some tests and library files that were missing the
semicolon at the end as well.
A bootstrap + test is currently underway on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
against trunk.
From: Dodji Seketeli
D
Paul,
> I am asking the question :-) Are the two equivalent? To my mind, it
> is a matter of taste, if they are.
in principle I prefer the approach of giving the vtabs the flavor
'FL_PARAMETER' from the start. However, that induces a couple of
regressions which are fixed by the (more ugly) addi
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:33, FX wrote:
> This patch for PR 47972 uses __builtin_choose_expr instead of the current
> if-else, avoiding the type warning for the branch not taken. This was
> suggested by Jakub in the PR itself.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux, OK to commit to trunk
Dear Janus,
I am asking the question :-) Are the two equivalent? To my mind, it
is a matter of taste, if they are.
Cheers
Paul
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Janus Weil wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>> As part of Tobias's fix for PR50640, he introduced:
>>
>> + if ((sym->attr.flavor == FL_PARAMETER
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/08/11 13:15, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/08/2011 08:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> Just to understand, what does this do with your optimization?
>>>
>>> void f(void *p) { if (p) { puts("sell_soul_to_devil");
>>> puts("post_reload_rewrite"); }
>>>
In x86/32bits, long is 4bytes, and the test checks for _ITM_RU8
(8bytes). I propose to change to long long (it is C99 but it should not
be a problem, right?). The other way could be to change the regex but we
don't want that.
Tested on x86.
Richard/Aldy, can you apply it to trunk and trans-mem
On 11/08/2011 08:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Just to understand, what does this do with your optimization?
void f(void *p) {
if (p) {
puts("sell_soul_to_devil"); puts("post_reload_rewrite"); }
*p = 2; }
... f(NULL);
Does the program sell its soul to the devil before crashing?
If "f" is not
Hi Paul,
> As part of Tobias's fix for PR50640, he introduced:
>
> + if ((sym->attr.flavor == FL_PARAMETER
> + && (sym->attr.dimension || sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED))
> + || sym->attr.vtab)
> TREE_READONLY (decl) = 1;
>
> Is this not sufficient to fix this PR too?
well, I think wh
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:44:47 +0100
> >> On 11/06/2011 07:38 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >>> This (formally a change in the range 181027:181034) got me three
> >>> libstdc++ regressions for cris-elf,
> >> yes, I have a final pending patch which didn't make it to the
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> On 11/05/2011 07:36 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> > +#define TYPE_DECL_NAMES_ALIAS_TEMPLATE_P(NODE) \
>>
>> This doesn't seem to be needed anymore.
>
> Removed, thanks.
>
>>
>> > +dump_alias_template_specialization (tr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/11 15:25, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> Indeed. We'd have to tell people that they cannot catch *(void *)0
> = 0 with a SIGSEGV signal handler unless they compile with some
> magic flag. Thus, the question is whether we want to optimize
> thin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/11 15:53, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek
> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> This patch attempts to optimize VEC_BASE if we know that offsetof
>> of base is 0 (unless the compiler is doing something strange, it
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/08/11 04:18, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/07/2011 07:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> But we're still stuck with the conditional leading to the path
>> with the __builtin_trap. That's what we want to avoid since
>> those conditionals are executed at ru
On 11/07/2011 03:28 PM, Walter Lee wrote:
> gcc:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02084.html
Well, I must say I'm a bit disappointed that the two ports
are just dis-similar enough to not be merged. And failing
that, I'd prefer to review them separately.
Tilepro:
> (UNSPEC_INSN_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/08/11 02:45, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 11/07/11 15:53, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek
>>> wro
>
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
> Behalf Of DJ Delorie
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 11:24 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: expr.c: don't assume MUL for scaling pointers
>
>
> GCC assumes the target
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/11 15:42, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> IIRC valgrind even offers simple branch predictor simulation - well
> predicted branches tend to be cheap.
It does. The predictor is based on processors that are 5-7 years old.
I don't generally look c
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 07:35:40PM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> I have a few questions:
>
> (1) Is sqrtl the only missing Fortran intrinsic?
> (2) Is there a list of missing intrinsics and platforms?
This is definitely platform dependent. For amd64-*freebsd,
troutmask:sgk[210] gmake che
On 13/04/2011 11:49, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 April 2011 11:43:43, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> This is a default ABI change (IIRC, when the option was
>>> introduced, it was left off as default so to not break the ABI).
>>>
>>> Shouldn't we advertise it somewhere?
>
>> Yes, I did recently a l
Hi David,
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:20 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>> Okay?
>>
>> Well, okay, but
>
> Also, there are other fixincludes fixes for missing braces that
> directly add the braces, not a wrapper. They are not multi-line
> macros, but there is a precedent on the style of solution.
I have a few questions:
(1) Is sqrtl the only missing Fortran intrinsic?
(2) Is there a list of missing intrinsics and platforms?
(3) Does it make any sense to support REAL(10) if sqrtl
is missing?
Cheers,
Dominique
Hi Janus,
As part of Tobias's fix for PR50640, he introduced:
+ if ((sym->attr.flavor == FL_PARAMETER
+ && (sym->attr.dimension || sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED))
+ || sym->attr.vtab)
TREE_READONLY (decl) = 1;
Is this not sufficient to fix this PR too?
Otherwise, your patch is, of
On 08/11/2011 18:12, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Dave Korn writes:
>
>> Notice how in your additions, you prepend the t-mingw-pthread file to the
>> list in $tmake_file rather than append it as the existing code does.
>> Ordering
>> of t-* files in $tmake_file is significant as there may be overrides
2011/11/7 Rainer Orth:
> Christian Joensson writes:
>
>> xgcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-pthread’
> [...]
>> Note the --enable-threads=posix.
>>
>> Backing off to revision 180766 does not yield this problem, while
>> 180767 has the problem.
>
> I erroneously moved the use of i38
On 11/08/2011 09:56 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 November 2011 17:31:45, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 11/08/2011 09:26 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 08 November 2011 16:33:52, Richard Henderson wrote:
toplevel/
* configure.ac: Adjust srcdir for running libitm/c
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Bruce Korb wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> Okay?
>
> Well, okay, but I'd prefer one fix something like the following (and I confess
> I've not had any test time...) because it looks simpler to me:
Also, there are other fixinclud
This patch fixes a bug wherein the trylock attribute would not work if
it was attached to a virtual method.
Bootstrapped and passed gcc regression testsuite on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Okay for google/gcc-4_6?
-DeLesley
Changelog.google-4_6:
2011-11-08 DeLesley Hutchins
* tree-threadsaf
On 30/10/2011 21:30, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Dave Korn wrote:
>> * htdocs/gcc-4.5/changes.html: Remove explicit mentions of ELF
>> format from LTO documentation.
>
> Ouch, I noticed this patch of yours never was applied, perhaps
> some misunderstanding between Richi
Dave Korn writes:
> Notice how in your additions, you prepend the t-mingw-pthread file to the
> list in $tmake_file rather than append it as the existing code does. Ordering
> of t-* files in $tmake_file is significant as there may be overrides and files
> should be listed from most generic to
On 07/11/2011 18:39, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Christian Joensson
>> xgcc: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-pthread’
> [...]
>> Note the --enable-threads=posix.
>>
>> Backing off to revision 180766 does not yield this problem, while
>> 180767 has the problem.
>
> I erroneously moved the
Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Georg-Johann, not sure whether the AVR follow-on patch was
> approved in the meantime, but the core support should be
> there now.
>
> Bye,
> Ulrich
Great! Many thanks
Johann
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 17:31:45, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 11/08/2011 09:26 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > On Tuesday 08 November 2011 16:33:52, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> toplevel/
> >> * configure.ac: Adjust srcdir for running libitm/configure.tgt.
> >
> >> +# Disable libitm on u
Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/28/11 18:06, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> >
> > The following patch still needs maintainer review:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg01874.html
>
> Looks straightforward to me. OK.
Thanks! I've checked the patch in now.
Georg-Johann, not sure whether the
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 11/07/11 19:15, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>
>> * config/c6x/t-elf (LIB2ADD): Add instead of assigning.
>
> It does seem happier that way, please install. Please also check the
> list of files Paolo generated.
Done. Checking this in other cases has been the plan all al
On 11/08/2011 10:05 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Ping. Ensure we don't predicate insns with the wrong condition in a
branch delay slot:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02447.html
Ok. Thanks, Bernd.
On 11/08/2011 09:26 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 November 2011 16:33:52, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> toplevel/
>> * configure.ac: Adjust srcdir for running libitm/configure.tgt.
>
>> +# Disable libitm on unsupported hosted systems.
>> +if test x$enable_libitm = x; then
>> + AC_
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 16:33:52, Richard Henderson wrote:
> toplevel/
> * configure.ac: Adjust srcdir for running libitm/configure.tgt.
> +# Disable libitm on unsupported hosted systems.
> +if test x$enable_libitm = x; then
> + AC_MSG_CHECKING([for libitm support])
> + if (srcdir=
Here is the revised patch. Bootstrap and regression tested on linux/x86-64.
Honza, can you comment on the implication of this change?
thanks,
David
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Here is the stack trace whe
In C++98 we can just conservatively assume that everything is an lvalue,
since the things an lvalue can do are a superset of what an rvalue can
do. But that isn't the case in C++11, since an lvalue can't bind to an
rvalue reference, so I changed lvalue_kind to work harder to figure out
whether
Bruce,
I don't want to add a layer and PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT_INTERNAL.
Thanks, David
On 10/28/11 18:06, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> The following patch still needs maintainer review:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg01874.html
Looks straightforward to me. OK.
Bernd
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Okay?
Well, okay, but I'd prefer one fix something like the following (and I confess
I've not had any test time...) because it looks simpler to me:
/*
* pthread.h on AIX defines PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT without enough braces.
* Rewrite the de
This is the final version of a patch I've had hanging around for about
6 months, it makes futures and shared_ptr use allocator_traits so they
work with minimal C++11 allocators, such as the testsuite's
SimpleAllocator, and implement the proposed resolution of LWG 2070
(which is still in Open state,
On 11/08/2011 05:10 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 17:41, Rainer Orth wrote:
Steve Kargl writes:
Please no: sqrtl is a C99 addition, and we don't want lists of non-C99
targets in tests that require them.
OK, so, then we simply accept that running a regression test
on the
On 11/07/11 19:15, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> * config/c6x/t-elf (LIB2ADD): Add instead of assigning.
It does seem happier that way, please install. Please also check the
list of files Paolo generated.
Bernd
As suggested by Joseph, this consolidates the knowledge of libitm
support in the libitm directory. And better, in a file not controlled
by autoconf, so less fumbling around for the correct edition. ;-)
Committed in two hunks because I faffed it the first time and managed
to not notice that I'd d
On Nov 8, 2011, at 7:29 AM, Quentin Neill wrote:
> FYI I see my patch was missing these two fixes:
> Okay to commit?
Ok.
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 04:41:32PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Steve Kargl writes:
>
> >> Please no: sqrtl is a C99 addition, and we don't want lists of non-C99
> >> targets in tests that require them.
> >>
> >
> > OK, so, then we simply accept that running a regression test
> > on these targets
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 17:41, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Steve Kargl writes:
>
>>> Please no: sqrtl is a C99 addition, and we don't want lists of non-C99
>>> targets in tests that require them.
>>>
>>
>> OK, so, then we simply accept that running a regression test
>> on these targets will always FAIL?
Steve Kargl writes:
>> Please no: sqrtl is a C99 addition, and we don't want lists of non-C99
>> targets in tests that require them.
>>
>
> OK, so, then we simply accept that running a regression test
> on these targets will always FAIL? If the answer is 'yes',
> then please close this PR becau
Hi,
with not much hope that this patch gets into 4.7 version, resent revised
version for the first part of patch. I updated the patch according to comments
I got by matz on IRC yesterday.
Patch uses now vector for collecting truth &/|'s conditional chain.
Additionally it checks now consisten
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Quentin Neill wrote:
>> This patch concatenates the common .sum files before comparing.
>>
>> Okay to commit?
>
> Ok, thanks for the contribution.
>
FYI I see my patch was missing these two fixes:
1. fix missing sum1
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:14:52AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Steve Kargl writes:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:55:48PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >> > The test uses the largest available floating-point number - be it 8, 10
> >> > or 16 - and tests for that. The checks should be thus OK fo
Ping. Ensure we don't predicate insns with the wrong condition in a
branch delay slot:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02447.html
Bernd
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> This fixes PR51010 by handling SSA names in the C/C++ pretty printers.
>
> Bootstrap and regtest pending on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, ok if that
> succeeds?
yes.
On 11/08/2011 06:51 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>> >> * configure.tgt: Handle i386 like i[456]86.
>>> >> * config/generic/tls.h [!HAVE_ARCH_GTM_THREAD] (gtm_thr): Don't
>>> >> take address.
>>> >> * config/generic/tls.cc [!HAVE_ARCH_GTM_THREAD ||
>>> >> !HAVE_ARCH_GTM_THREAD_DISP] (_gtm_thr_tls):
Richard Henderson writes:
>> Solaris/SPARC is going to have a similar issue: the default configure
>> triplet is sparc-sun-solaris2*, still it defaults to v8plus, so cas is
>> available. I haven't tried a bootstrap yet, though.
>
> Of course there's a bit more porting work to do for a new
Joern Rennecke wrote:
> That's true, and it is by design.
> This use of set_unique_reg_note is a bit debatable - add_reg_note
> should do just fine there.
>
> OTOH keeping this as it is, and keeping set_unique_reg_note accepting USE
> in this case, seems more conservative for stage3.
A tiny chan
On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> On 8 Nov 2011, at 00:21, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> >
> > > > How is the default selected (that's not obvious to me).
> > > > flag_next_runtime
> > > > doesn't use options mechanisms it seems, that's bad. Bot
On 8 Nov 2011, at 00:21, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Iain Sandoe wrote:
How is the default selected (that's not obvious to me).
flag_next_runtime
doesn't use options mechanisms it seems, that's bad. Both
-fgnu-runtime and -fnext-runtime are frontend-only flags, they
shoul
Remove commented out code.
The patch is for google/main branch.
2011-11-08 Dmitriy Vyukov
* gcc/doc/invoke.texi:
* gcc/tree-tsan.c (enum tsan_ignore_type):
(struct bb_data):
(struct mop_desc):
(struct tsan_ignore_desc):
(build_var_decl):
Fix crashes during instrumentation.
The patch is for google/main branch.
2011-11-08 Dmitriy Vyukov
* gcc/doc/invoke.texi:
* gcc/tree-tsan.c (enum tsan_ignore_type):
(struct bb_data):
(struct mop_desc):
(struct tsan_ignore_desc):
(build_var_decl)
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
