On 06/14/2012 04:13 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
C++ Frontend maintainers, Could you please take a look at the
front-end part when you find the time?
It seems to me that what you have here are target-specific attributes
that affect the signature of a function such that they make two
declara
Hi,
After inlining, IPA calls tree_profiling which rebuilds edges:
#2 0x00683ccd in rebuild_cgraph_edges ()
at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/cgraphbuild.c:433
#3 0x00c02de6 in tree_profiling ()
at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/gcc/tree-profile.c:564
#4 0x00a1be4f
On 03.07.2012 15:37, Richard Guenther wrote:
> People are running into issues when mixing cloog built against isl 0.08
> and gcc building against isl 0.10 (which is expected I guess).
> CLooG needs to be configured to use GMP
> +internally, use @option{--with-bits=gmp} to direct it to do that.
wh
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Uros Bizjak writes:
>> Sometimes, gcc generates:
>>
>> leaq(%rbx,%rax), %rax
>>
>> that is in fact equivalent (modulo flags reg clobber) to:
>>
>> addq%rbx, %rax
>>
>> Attached patch adds additional peephole2 patterns that convert LEA t
Hi Mikael, hi all,
Mikael Morin wrote:
index f135af1..6c58a8e 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
@@ -8319,12 +8323,15 @@ gfc_walk_array_ref (gfc_ss * ss, gfc_expr *
expr, gfc_ref * ref)
break;
case AR_FULL:
- newss = gfc_get_array_ss (ss, e
Working on LRA regression on ppc after the merge, I found that lo_sum
support improves code size significantly. Here the patch to support lo_sum.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64 and ppc.
Committed as rev. 189333.
2012-07-05 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-constraints.
On 27 June 2012 21:27, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 05:44 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> + case NEON_DUP:
>> + if (TREE_CODE (argp[0]) == INTEGER_CST
>> + || TREE_CODE (argp[0]) == REAL_CST)
>> + return build_vector_from_val (result_type,
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 06/29/2012 11:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> 2012-05-31 H.J. Lu
>>>
>>>PR target/53539
>>>* config/i386/gnu-user64.h (WCHAR_TYPE): Use "int" only for
>>>TARGET_LP64.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/gnu-user64
Between June 12 and June 28 I checked in lots of GCC testsuite patches
to individual tests and to test infrastrure files to eliminate
non-unique lines in test summaries, as well as a few related cleanups.
May I backport those to GCC 4.7?
Janis
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> > +cc c++ front-end maintainers
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >C++ Frontend maintainers, Could you please take a look at the
> > front-end part when you find the time?
>
> So you have (f
> Note that most other places in force_to_mode optimizing shifts already
> check for non-negative shift amounts; but in this place the check is
> missing.
>
> The following patch adds the check here as well, fixing the undefined
> behaviour (and subsequent bootstrap comparison failure) in my test.
On 06/07/12 13:01, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> On 05/07/12 15:30, Michael Matz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>>
The asserts allow the return result to be optimized, but not the cfg
conditions.
>>>
tsubst doesn't handle pack expansions directly; any place where a pack
expansion is valid needs to test for them and call
tsubst_pack_expansion. Here, the code for testing whether a non-deduced
template argument is relevant to the argument types was failing to do
so. Conveniently, we already
Hi,
This patch reduces codesize for cases such as this one:
int arr[100];
int foo () { return arr[10]; }
Before the patch, the code looked like this:
adrp x0, arr
add x0, x0, :lo12:arr
ldr w0, [x0,40]
Now, it looks like this:
adrp x0, arr+40
ldr w0, [x0,#:lo12:arr+40]
Some workloads
Uros Bizjak writes:
> Hello!
>
> Sometimes, gcc generates:
>
> leaq(%rbx,%rax), %rax
>
> that is in fact equivalent (modulo flags reg clobber) to:
>
> addq%rbx, %rax
>
> Attached patch adds additional peephole2 patterns that convert LEA to
> ADD when second operand of PLUS RTX matches out
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Attached patch partially reverts r187375 [1]. Apparently, the patch
> added some new functionality to symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes,
> although the ChangeLog said:
>
> Log:
> ...
> (symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes):
Hi,
tested x86_64-linux, committed mainline and 4_7-branch.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2012-07-06 Paolo Carlini
PR libstdc++/53872
* include/std/thread (thread::_M_make_routine): Qualify make_shared
to prevent ADL.
* testsuite/30_threads/thread/adl.c
On 12-07-06 00:38 , Sandeep Soni wrote:
I am halfway through the patch for building gimple_cond statements. I
will be able to complete the patch over the weekend. I am also working
towards a patch that generalizes the assignment statements considering
all possible types of assignments.
Great!
Since my fix for 53563, we were ignoring alias templates when looking
for a type template name. Fixed thus.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit d46136fac2f8b4b126d498031b4bb02a23d5738a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri Jul 6 09:21:51 2012 -0400
PR c++/53858
* name-
Hello,
in testing a patch on arm-linux-gnueabihf, I ran into a bootstrap comparison
failure that turned out to be caused by a pre-existing bug in common code,
where combine.c code exposed undefined behaviour.
The problem is this code in force_to_mode when simplifying a LSHIFTRT:
/* Here we
On Jul 6, 2012, at 15:04 , David Edelsohn wrote:
>> libstdc++-v3/
>>
>>* acinclude.m4 (check for mutex_timelock): Check straight
>>on _POSIX_TIMEOUTS, regardless of defined (_PTHREADS).
>>* configure: Regenerate.
>
> It's okay with me, but I do not know who can approve i
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Olivier Hainque wrote:
>
> libstdc++-v3/
>
> * acinclude.m4 (check for mutex_timelock): Check straight
> on _POSIX_TIMEOUTS, regardless of defined (_PTHREADS).
> * configure: Regenerate.
It's okay with me, but I do not know who can approve
Hello,
On a gcc 4.7 tree, we are witnessing build failures on Aix 5.2 with libstdc++
failing on
<<
...pthread/libstdc++-v3/include/powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0/bits/gthr-posix.h:789:69:
error: 'pthread_mutex_timedlock' was not declared in this scope
>>
The anomaly is visible from the libstd
Right, flag_android looks better, thanks.
Probably it's even better to check also bionic (OPTION_BIONIC)
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> For runtime stack protector enabling on x86 for Android we have to
>
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > Yes, I think that would be the most clean solution - unfortunately
> > the current setup of the toplevel hierarchy does not support this
> > (easily, at least). A way out would be to always claim stuf
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Yes, I think that would be the most clean solution - unfortunately
> the current setup of the toplevel hierarchy does not support this
> (easily, at least). A way out would be to always claim stuff is
> installed - thus, use the =system variants and a
On Jun 21, 2012, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Here's one more patch that addresses a problem I found out while
> investigating the PR53671 regressions: rather than recording incoming
> stack args as MEMs with non-VALUE expressions, it's more consistent (and
> less surprising) if we emit them as VALUE
On Jun 21, 2012, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> for gcc/ChangeLog
> from Alexandre Oliva
> PR debug/53671
> PR debug/49888
> * alias.c (memrefs_conflict_p): Improve handling of AND for
> alignment.
There was a thinko in this patch. We can't move the offset by more
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 05/07/12 15:30, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>
>>> The asserts allow the return result to be optimized, but not the cfg
>>> conditions.
>>>
>>> AFAIU, we can insert the asserts earlier. F.i., we c
Hello!
Sometimes, gcc generates:
leaq(%rbx,%rax), %rax
that is in fact equivalent (modulo flags reg clobber) to:
addq%rbx, %rax
Attached patch adds additional peephole2 patterns that convert LEA to
ADD when second operand of PLUS RTX matches output operand.
2012-07-06 Uros Bizjak
Hello!
2012-07-06 Uros Bizjak
* config/i386/i386.c (construct_plt_address): Make static.
* config/i386/i386-protos.h (construct_plt_address): Remove.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed to mainline SVN.
Uros.
Index: i386-protos.h
=
Hi Jeff,
Thanks - patch committed. I decided that it would be best to call
default_encode_section_info first, just in case it turns out to be
important one day.
Cheers
Nick
Hello!
Symbol references are not legitimate sibcall operands for
-mcmodel=large, so have to be moved to registers (using movabs).
Unfortunately, moving symbol references for CM_LARGE_PIC requires PIC
fixup which by default generates Pmode pseudos. When generating thunk
in x86_output_mi_thunk, we a
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > >
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is a first stab at making the core CFG code independent of the
> expression intermediate representation datatypes. This patch deals
> with cfg.c and cfganal.c but it shouldn't be a surprise that the patch
> touches a lot of
Chung-Lin Tang writes:
>> __builtin_thread_pointer is logically a separate patch anyway.
>> In case it isn't clear, the reason I'm pushing back about the
>> target-dependent thing is that you're adding a fair bit of extra
>> code to the general MIPS built-in infrastructure in order to
>> handle th
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 03/05/12 12:21, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> On 27/04/12 11:01, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
I see you do not handle
>>>
struct S { int i; };
struct S foo (vo
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> +cc c++ front-end maintainers
>
> Hi,
>
>C++ Frontend maintainers, Could you please take a look at the
> front-end part when you find the time?
So you have (for now?) omitted the C frontend change(s)?
>Honza, your thoughts on the
Hi
I updated this patch to use const_ok_for_dimode_op to decide if a
const is legal for iordi3 insn. The special cases of all 0 and all 1
constant are also handled.
Tested on arm qemu with all thumb/arm neon/non-neon combination, no regression.
thanks
Carrot
2012-07-06 Wei Guozhi
P
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
> Hi!
>
> For runtime stack protector enabling on x86 for Android we have to
> disable current glibc-based implementation and turn on default one
> since bionic doesn't use value from gs:0x14.
>
> Tested in android environment(x86_64-*-linux-an
Hi!
For runtime stack protector enabling on x86 for Android we have to
disable current glibc-based implementation and turn on default one
since bionic doesn't use value from gs:0x14.
Tested in android environment(x86_64-*-linux-android), also
bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
> > Revised patch attached. It still generates the same (fixed) debug info
> > for the reduced testcase. I'll do a full testing cycle if you're happy
> > with it.
> >
> >
> > * dwarf2out.c (function_possibly_abstracted_p): New static
> > function. (gen_subprogram_die): Use it function_pos
On 2012/7/6 02:23 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Richard Sandiford writes:
>>> (3) Also related to libraries, I edited CRT_CALL_STATIC_FUNCTION to emit
>>> a 32-bit code sequence under both MIPS/MIPS16 mode (under O32).
>>>
>>> As you can see in the original Feb. patch, I had changes to emit a
>>>
43 matches
Mail list logo
