Re: [PATCH] Reduce conservativeness in REE using machine model (issue6631066)

The change to remove mode check looks good to me. Not directly related to this bug but somehow related: the REE has obvious conservativeness regarding partial redundancy (i.e., not all reaching def has the bits properly extended). However, there are bugs preventing elimination even with full redu

Re: [asan] migrate runtime from llvm

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Wei Mi wrote: >> >> This is a good start. Can you send a patch out without including >> libasan so at least the toplevel parts can be reviewed easier? >> Also the changelog entry for gcc.c go under the gcc/ChangeLog rather >> than the toplevel one. >> >> Thanks,

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

Vladimir Makarov writes: > On 12-10-15 4:25 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> Richard Sandiford writes: >>> Vladimir Makarov writes: After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find a mode o

[PATCH] Stop looping in move_by_pieces loops when there's no more data to process

Jakub, I've noticed that the move_by_pieces loops keep iterating after there's no more data to process. I've added this assert to trigger an example in a gcc build: ... Index: src/gcc/expr.c === --- src/gcc/expr.c (revision 191792) +

Re: [asan] migrate runtime from llvm

> > This is a good start. Can you send a patch out without including > libasan so at least the toplevel parts can be reviewed easier? > Also the changelog entry for gcc.c go under the gcc/ChangeLog rather > than the toplevel one. > > Thanks, > Andrew Pinski Sure, I attach it. Thanks for pointing

Re: [asan] migrate runtime from llvm

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wei Mi wrote: > Hi, > > I create a patch to migrate llvm runtime to asan branch. The > configure.ac is a preliminary version and almost doesn't contain any > portability check. I build it and test my own small case only and it > works. Just send it out to ask for

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

Another error checking feature is to poison stack vars on entry and exit of the lexical scope to catch uninit variable reference and out of scope references: S* sp; { S s; sp = &s; } .. *sp ... This is relatively easy to do in gcc thanks to the clobber statement. In Clang/LLVM, it i

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

On 12-10-15 4:25 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: Richard Sandiford writes: Vladimir Makarov writes: After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

On 12-10-15 3:10 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: Vladimir Makarov writes: After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find it as the

loop-unroll.c TLC

Hi, this patch applies some TLC on RTL loop unroller. The following issues are fixed: 1) while updating loop-iv.c I did not notice that the upper bound computed is in fact conditional on infinite and assumptions flags. The patch disables adding it if those are non-zero. I checked it do

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 01 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > Regarding ChangeLog entries, I can add them to each > change set, if that is needed. However, I was hoping to > wait on that until the patches are generally approved, > in principle. As a patch submitter, it's your responsibility to make it easy for revi

Re: [RFA:] Fix frame-pointer-clobbering in builtins.c:expand_builtin_setjmp_receiver

On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > (insn 168 49 51 3 (set (reg/f:DI 253 $253) > > (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 253 $253) > > (const_int 24 [0x18]))) > > /tmp/mmiximp2/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/built-in-setjmp.c:21 > > -1 (nil)) > > (insn 51 168 52 3 (clobber (reg/

Re: Propagate profile counts during switch expansion

> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Index: optabs.c > > === > > --- optabs.c(revision 191879) > > +++ optabs.c(working copy) > > @@ -4249,7 +4249,7 @@ prepare_operand (enum insn_code icode, rt

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 01 of 16)

On 10/15/12 21:59:34, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > > > Some UPC-specific configuration options are added to > > the top-level configure.ac and gcc/configure.ac scripts. > > Any patch that includes new configure options should include the > documentation for

Committed, MMIX: fix */builtin-apply-2.c for an instrumented setup.

When running the test-suite for these tests on an instrumented mmix simulator (plus gcc and newlib patches to match) that, instead of silently allocating zeros, barfs on accesses beyond the defined stack, these tests fail because of that check. There are no stack parameters to copy, so there's jus

Re: [SH] PR 54925 - Add test case

On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 20:37 +0900, Kaz Kojima wrote: > Oleg Endo wrote: > > This adds the test case from the PR. > > Tested together with the patch posted here > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01380.html > > > > OK? > > It would be better to make it a valid C program. I've check

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 02 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > Attached, patch 02 of 16. > > This patch set lists the small set of changes required > in the C++ and Objective C front-end to accommodate > changes needed for UPC. > > gcc/c/c-decl.c is also included here, to illustrate > both the UPC front-end changes a

RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 02 of 16)

Attached, patch 02 of 16. This patch set lists the small set of changes required in the C++ and Objective C front-end to accommodate changes needed for UPC. gcc/c/c-decl.c is also included here, to illustrate both the UPC front-end changes and to motivate the introduction of c_build_qualified_typ

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 01 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > Some UPC-specific configuration options are added to > the top-level configure.ac and gcc/configure.ac scripts. Any patch that includes new configure options should include the documentation for those options in install.texi. Also please include ChangeL

EnabledBy(Wa && Wb)

The following patch allows to specify that one option is enabled if two other options are enabled at the same time. The code only handles two options and not an arbitrary number because that is simpler and we don't need more (for now). Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK?

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > On 10/15/12 17:06:28, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > > > Various UPC language related checks and operations > > > are called in the "C" front-end and middle-end. > > > To insure that these operations are defined, > > > w

Re: [c-family] Fix -fdump-ada-spec buglet in C++

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > since the sizetype change, we generate invalid Ada for flexible array members > with -fdump-ada-spec in C++. The attached patch fixes this issue and also > partially revamps the code to polish some rough edges. > > Tested on x86_64-suse-linu

RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 01 of 16)

Attached, patch 01 of 16. These are configure and 'make' related changes that introduce UPC support into GCC. As noted previously, these changes build the UPC front-end as a 'cc1upc' binary in a fashion similar to Objective C. There are also specific ABI adjustments made for passing UPC pointers

Re: [PATCH] Reduce conservativeness in REE using machine model (issue6631066)

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:44:12PM -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote: >> Revised patch to address conservative behavior in redundant extend >> elimination that was resulting in redundant extends not being >> removed. Now uses a new target hook mach

[PATCH] Install error handler for out-of-memory when using STL containers Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

Hi, On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has thr

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On 10/15/12 17:06:28, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > > Various UPC language related checks and operations > > are called in the "C" front-end and middle-end. > > To insure that these operations are defined, > > when linked with the other language front-ends > > an

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

Richard Sandiford writes: > Vladimir Makarov writes: >>After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a >> review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find >> a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find >> it as the operan

Re: Ping: RFA: add lock_length attribute to break branch-shortening cycles

Joern Rennecke writes: > 2012-10-04 Joern Rennecke > > * final.c (get_attr_length_1): Use direct recursion rather than > calling get_attr_length. > (get_attr_lock_length): New function. > (INSN_VARIABLE_LENGTH_P): Define. > (shorten_branches): Take H

Re: RFC: C++ PATCH to support dynamic initialization and destruction of C++11 and OpenMP TLS variables

domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) writes: > On x86_64-apple-darwin10 The following tests: > > g++.dg/gomp/tls-5.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local-cse.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order*.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local*g.C > > fail with > > sorry, unimplemented: dynamic initialization of non-function-lo

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

Vladimir Makarov writes: >After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a > review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find > a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find > it as the operand and insn template operand has V

Re: [patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

Steven Bosscher writes: > * combine.c (record_dead_and_set_regs): Iterate over hard register set > with a hard_reg_set_iterator. > * cse.c (invalidate_for_call): Likewise. > * gcse.c (compute_hash_table_work): Likewise. > * loop-iv.c (simplify_using_initial_values): L

[PATCH, i386]: Split unaligned SSE move to unaligned load/store (Was: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this >> > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned >> > value and one to *store* and unaligned value, and not permit that memory >> > ac

Re: Propagate profile counts during switch expansion

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > > Index: optabs.c > === > --- optabs.c(revision 191879) > +++ optabs.c(working copy) > @@ -4249,7 +4249,7 @@ prepare_operand (enum insn_code icode, rtx x, int > w

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

On 10/15/2012 11:33 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: + && pedantic && cxx_dialect == cxx98) + { + cp_token *token = cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer); + error_at (token->location, + "in C++98 % (as a disambiguator) is only " + "allowed w

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

On 10/15/2012 07:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: Actually, let's keep the diagnostic when compiling with -pedantic in 98 mode. ... too late! ;) So I prepared the below, I'm finishing testing it. Thanks, Paolo. // /cp 2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini PR c++/50080 (again)

Re: [patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > GCC has hard_reg_set_iterator to iterate quickly over a HARD_REG_SET, > but it's not used a lot. Attached patch makes a few files use it to > iterate over regs_invalidated_by_call. If this is OK, I'd like to > convert loops over H

[c-family] Fix -fdump-ada-spec buglet in C++

Hi, since the sizetype change, we generate invalid Ada for flexible array members with -fdump-ada-spec in C++. The attached patch fixes this issue and also partially revamps the code to polish some rough edges. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, OK for mainline? 2012-10-15 Eric Botcazou c-fami

Re: [RFC] Fix spill failure at -O on 64-bit Windows

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > This extends the lifetime of the hard register up to the beginning of the > function, causing reload to die on the complex division instruction. Does this still happen after my patch from yesterday to use DF_LIVE in IRA? > The attached patc

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 17805

OK. Jason

[RFC] Fix spill failure at -O on 64-bit Windows

(reg:SI 43 r14 [175]) (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 17 flags) (nil)) +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.8.0 20121015 (experimental) [trunk revision 192447] (x86_64-pc-mingw32) GCC error:| | in spill_failure, at reload1.c:2124

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has three pro

Re: RFC: C++ PATCH to support dynamic initialization and destruction of C++11 and OpenMP TLS variables

On 10/05/2012 10:38 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 10/05/2012 04:29 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: Or if we have the extra indirection via a reference anyway, we could have a pointer TLS variable (NULL initialized) that on the first access will trap where in a trap handler we could then perform initia

[lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find it as the operand and insn template operand has VOIDmode. There are still cases wh

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

Actually, let's keep the diagnostic when compiling with -pedantic in 98 mode. Jason

Re: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this >> > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned >> > value and one to *sto

Re: [libcpp] Free some variables

> "Tobias" == Tobias Burnus writes: Tobias> Build on x86-64-linux with C/C++/Fortran. I will now do an Tobias> all-language build/regtest. Tobias> OK when it passes? Tobias> 2012-10-03 Tobias Burnus Tobias> * files.c (read_file_guts, _cpp_save_file_entries): Free memory Tobias>

[PATCH][AArch64] Restrict usage of SBFIZ to valid range only

This fixes an issue where we were generating an SBFIZ with operand 3 outside of the valid range (as determined by the size of the destination register and the amount of shift). My patch checks that the range is valid before allowing the pattern to be used. This has now had full regression testing

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > Various UPC language related checks and operations > are called in the "C" front-end and middle-end. > To insure that these operations are defined, > when linked with the other language front-ends > and compilers, these functions are stub-ed, > in a fashion

[Cilkplus] Merged with trunk at revision 192446.

Cilk Plus branch was merged with trunk at revision 192446. Committed as revision 192464. Thanks, Balaji V. Iyer.

Re: RFC: LRA for x86/x86-64 [7/9] -- continuation

Hi Vlad, Some comments about the rest of LRA. Nothing major here... Vladimir Makarov writes: > +/* Info about register in an insn. */ > +struct lra_insn_reg > +{ > + /* The biggest mode through which the insn refers to the register > + (remember the register can be accessed through a subr

[patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

Hello, GCC has hard_reg_set_iterator to iterate quickly over a HARD_REG_SET, but it's not used a lot. Attached patch makes a few files use it to iterate over regs_invalidated_by_call. If this is OK, I'd like to convert loops over HARD_REG_SETs to iterators where possible. Bootstrapped&tested on x

Re: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue

Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this > > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned > > value and one to *store* and unaligned value, and not permit th

Re: [PATCH] Rs6000 infrastructure cleanup (switches), revised patch #4

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 03:52:01PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Michael Meissner wrote: > > > I decided to see if it was possible to simplify the change over by adding > > another flag word in the .opt handling to give the old names (TARGET_ > > and > > MASK_). For Joseph

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

OK. Jason

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > In my opinion, supporting the full range of GCC testsuite annotations > means imposing a lot of mechanism that the Go testsuite does not > require. It would complicate the Go testsuite for no benefit. > Anybody who can understand the GC

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On 10/15/12 17:51:14, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Gary Funck wrote: [...] > > UPC-Related Front-End Changes > > - > > > > GCC's internal tree representation is > > extended to record the UPC "shared", > > "strict", "relaxed" qualifiers, >

Ping^2 Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

Ping^2. This patch (non-C parts) is still pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Ian Lance Taylor writes: > >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> >>> I don't see how can their testcase be used if not converted to Dejagnu >>> though, most of their testcases are full of LLVM testcase markup >>> (// RU

Re: [PATCH] Rs6000 infrastructure cleanup (switches), revised patch #4

On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Michael Meissner wrote: > I decided to see if it was possible to simplify the change over by adding > another flag word in the .opt handling to give the old names (TARGET_ and > MASK_). For Joseph Myers and Neil Booth, the issue is when changing all > of the switches that use

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Gary Funck wrote: > We have maintained the gupc (GNU Unified Parallel C) branch for > a couple of years now, and would like to merge these changes into > the GCC trunk. > > It is our goal to integrate the GUPC changes into the GCC 4.8 > trunk, in order to provide a

RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

We have maintained the gupc (GNU Unified Parallel C) branch for a couple of years now, and would like to merge these changes into the GCC trunk. It is our goal to integrate the GUPC changes into the GCC 4.8 trunk, in order to provide a UPC (Unified Parallel C) capability in the subsequent GCC 4.8

Re: [patch] [gcc/libgcc/ada/libstdc++] Match arm*-*-linux-*eabi* for ARM Linux/GNU EABI

On 15/10/12 15:20, Matthias Klose wrote: On 26.06.2012 11:10, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 22:30, Matthias Klose wrote: On 25.06.2012 18:21, Matthias Klose wrote: On 25.06.2012 15:22, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 13:08, Matthias Klose wrote: gcc/config.gcc now allows matching a

[C++ Patch] PR 50080

Hi, thus, if I understand correctly the resolution of Core/468 [CD1], we can simplify a bit the parser and just accept these 'template' outside templates. Tested x86_64-linux. Thanks, Paolo. /// /cp 2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini PR c++/50080 * parser.c (cp_

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Rainer Orth Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:44:44 +0200 > David Miller writes: > I'm just calling it VIS4 in GCC so that we can export intrinsics of, for example, the cryptographic instructions at some point using the __VIS__ version CPP tests. >>> >>> ...that's why I'm not sure

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Rainer Orth Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:28:15 +0200 > David Miller writes: > >> Could one of you help me get the solaris side correct? I made sure >> that binutils accepts the same options for this stuff, that's why >> I can unconditionally use '-xarch=sparc4' in the configure test. > > I

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

David Miller writes: >>> I'm just calling it VIS4 in GCC so that we can export intrinsics of, >>> for example, the cryptographic instructions at some point using the >>> __VIS__ version CPP tests. >> >> ...that's why I'm not sure we should invent VIS4 at this point. How is this >> done on the

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Eric Botcazou Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:00:02 +0200 >> > The only versions of the Solaris assembler I have access to only support >> > v8plusX according to the man page. Has that changed recently? >> >> For the older stuff I mean doing something like "-m32 -xarch=v9X" > > OK, this is for

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

Ian Lance Taylor writes: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >> I don't see how can their testcase be used if not converted to Dejagnu >> though, most of their testcases are full of LLVM testcase markup >> (// RUN, // CHECK*, etc.). So, if we import the library unmodified

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

David Miller writes: > Could one of you help me get the solaris side correct? I made sure > that binutils accepts the same options for this stuff, that's why > I can unconditionally use '-xarch=sparc4' in the configure test. I assume this works because gas 2.22 had neither SPARC-T4 support nor

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

Eric Botcazou writes: >> > The only versions of the Solaris assembler I have access to only support >> > v8plusX according to the man page. Has that changed recently? >> >> For the older stuff I mean doing something like "-m32 -xarch=v9X" > > OK, this is for fbe, not for as. I think that the l

Re: [patch] [gcc/libgcc/ada/libstdc++] Match arm*-*-linux-*eabi* for ARM Linux/GNU EABI

On 26.06.2012 11:10, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 25/06/12 22:30, Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 25.06.2012 18:21, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> On 25.06.2012 15:22, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 13:08, Matthias Klose wrote: > gcc/config.gcc now allows matching arm*-*-linux-*eabi* instead o

[PATCH] Last LTO streaming adjustment

This moves TRANSLATION_UNIT_LANGUAGE to the bitpack section. LTO bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Richard. 2012-10-15 Richard Biener * data-streamer.h (bp_pack_string_with_length): New function. (bp_pack_string): Likewise. (bp_unpack_indexed_strin

Re: [path] PR 54900: store data race in if-conversion pass

On 10/15/2012 08:28 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: I am having a bit of a problem coming up with a generic testcase. Perhaps Andrew or others have an idea. The attached testcase fails to trigger without the patch, because AFAICT we have no way of testing an addition of zero to a memory location:

Re: Constant-fold vector comparisons

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote: else if ((code == BIT_NOT_EXPR && TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (cond)) == 1) || (code == BIT_XOR_EXPR - && integer_onep (gimple_assign_rhs2 (def_stmt + && ((gimple_assign_rhs_code

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++] Fix missing gthr-default.h issue on libstdc++ configure

On Oct 15, 2012, at 15:12 , Kirill Yukhin wrote: >> I was able to bootstrap successfully with the patch. > > Checked in: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00581.html Thanks :)

Re: [PATCH] Cleanup comments in alias.c

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Hello, > > While reading alias.c, it seemed to me that some comments could use > some cleanups. > > OK for trunk? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks. > > gcc/ > > * alias.c: Cleanup comments. > --- > gcc/alias.c | 27 +--

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 15/10/2012 14:53, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: >> I think I've shown above that we're all looking at the wrong pass... > > I think you have... so we want a patch like this? I don't think so. df_kill_notes is already supposed to take care o

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 15/10/2012 14:53, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: > I think I've shown above that we're all looking at the wrong pass... I think you have... so we want a patch like this? Index: df-problems.c === --- df-problems.c (revisione 183

[PATCH] Cleanup comments in alias.c

Hello, While reading alias.c, it seemed to me that some comments could use some cleanups. OK for trunk? Thanks. gcc/ * alias.c: Cleanup comments. --- gcc/alias.c | 27 +-- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/alias.c b/gcc/alias.c

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++] Fix missing gthr-default.h issue on libstdc++ configure

>> Looks Ok. If David can test is successfully on AIX I can approve it. > > I was able to bootstrap successfully with the patch. Checked in: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00581.html Thanks, K

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information >> that is correct, that we had before DF_RD_PRUNE_DEAD_DEFS, that we can >> update, and that helps with optimization. With renaming these notes >> are valid, and do not r

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

Hi Janne, thanks for the review. On 2012-10-14 23:35, Janne Blomqvist wrote: - Personally, I'd prefer the C++ version; The C++ standard library is widely used and documented and using it in favour of rolling our own is IMHO a good idea. - I'd be vary wrt backporting, in my experience the modu

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has three pro

[path] PR 54900: store data race in if-conversion pass

[Ian, I am copying you because this is originally your code. Richard, I am copying you because you are all things aliased :-). And Andrew is here because I am unable to come up with a suitable test for the simulate-thread harness.]. Here we have a store data race because noce_can_store_specu

Re: RFC: LRA for x86/x86-64 [7/9] -- continuation

Vladimir Makarov writes: >> if that's accurate. I dropped the term "reload pseudo" because of >> the general comment in my earlier reply about the use of "reload pseudo" >> when the code seems to include inheritance and split pseudos too. > There is no inheritance and splitting yet. It is done a

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 15/10/2012 10:37, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: >> I prefer to declare the notes invalid and drop the notes. > Then, afaic, our only option is to drop them all in web, as per attached > patch. > > I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information > that is correct, that we ha

Re: [SH] PR 54925 - Add test case

Oleg Endo wrote: > This adds the test case from the PR. > Tested together with the patch posted here > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01380.html > > OK? It would be better to make it a valid C program. I've checked that the test case with the change below also ICEs on revision 192

Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Add vcond, vcondu support.

On 09/10/12 12:08, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This patch adds support for vcond and vcondu to the AArch64 backend. Tested with no regressions on aarch64-none-elf. OK for aarch64-branch? (If so, someone will have to commit for me, as I do not have commit rights.) Thanks James Greenhalgh --

Re: Ping^2: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives

On 10/15/2012 06:41 AM, Joern Rennecke wrote: > The following patch is still awaiting review: > > 2011-09-19 J"orn Rennecke > > * genoutput.c (process_template): Process '*' in '@' alternatives. > * doc/md.texi (node Output Statement): Provide example for the > above. > > http

Re: [SH] PR 51244 - Catch more unnecessary sign/zero extensions

Oleg Endo wrote: > This one refactors some copy pasta that my previous patch regarding this > matter introduced and catches more unnecessary sign/zero extensions of T > bit stores. It also fixes the bug reported in PR 54925 which popped up > after the last patch for PR 51244. > Tested on rev 1924

Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Refactor Advanced SIMD builtin initialisation.

On 05/10/12 16:52, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This patch refactors the initialisation code for the Advanced SIMD builtins under the AArch64 target. The patch has been regression tested on aarch64-none-elf. OK for aarch64-branch? (If yes, someone will have to commit this for me as I do not ha

Re: [SH] PR 54760 - Add DImode GBR loads/stores, fix optimization

Oleg Endo wrote: > I somehow initially forgot to implement DImode GBR based loads/stores. > Attached patch does that and also fixes a problem with the GBR address > mode optimization. > Tested on rev 192417 with > make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim > \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-

Re: [SH] PR 34777 - Add test case

Oleg Endo wrote: > The attached patch adds gcc.target/sh/torture and puts the test there. > The torture subdir might be also useful in the future. > Tested on rev 192417 with > make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim\{-m2/-ml}" > > OK? OK. Regards, kaz

Re: [SH] Document function attributes

Oleg Endo wrote: > The attached patch adds documentation for SH specific function > attributes which haven't been documented yet. > Tested with 'make info dvi pdf'. > OK? OK. Regards, kaz

[PATCH] Fix PR54920

This fixes PR54920. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied on trunk and the 4.7 branch. Richard. 2012-10-15 Richard Guenther PR tree-optimization/54920 * tree-ssa-pre.c (create_expression_by_pieces): Properly allocate temporary storage for all N

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Where is mark_addressable called? It's wrong (and generally impossible) to >> do that late. > > In expr.c:emit_block_move_hints. It's one of the calls added to support the > enhanced DSE last year, there are others in calls.c for example.

Re: [lra] patch from Richard Sandiford's review of lra-constraints.c

Thanks for the updates, they look good to me. Vladimir Makarov writes: > @@ -100,8 +102,9 @@ >o for pseudos needing save/restore code around calls. > > If the split pseudo still has the same hard register as the > -original pseudo after the subsequent assignment pass, the oppos

Fix double write of unchecked conversion to volatile variable

For the attached Ada testcase, the compiler generates a double write to the volatile variable at -O1. The problem is a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR on the rhs. We have in store_expr: If TEMP and TARGET compare equal according to rtx_equal_p, but one or both of them are volatile memory refs, we h

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

> Where is mark_addressable called? It's wrong (and generally impossible) to > do that late. In expr.c:emit_block_move_hints. It's one of the calls added to support the enhanced DSE last year, there are others in calls.c for example. > If you only have memcpy then escaped will be empty. fixin

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I prefer to declare the notes invalid and drop the notes. > > I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information > that is correct, that we had before DF_RD_PRUN

  1   2   >