Re: [PATCH] Merge cgraph_get_create_node and cgraph_get_create_real_symbol_node

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> as discussed with Honza on many occasions, all users of >> cgraph_get_create_node really want cgraph_get_create_real_symbol_node, >> i.e. they are not interested in inline nodes and should get a >> standalone node instead. So this patch chan

Re: [PATCH 2/6] Hand-written port of various accessors within gimple.h

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: * gimple.h (gimple_use_ops): Port from union to usage of dyn_cast. (gimple_set_use_ops): Port from union to usage of as_a. (gimple_set_vuse): Likewise. (gimple_set_vdef): Likewise. (gimple_call_internal_fn): P

Re: [PATCH 3/6] Automated part of conversion of gimple types to use C++ inheritance

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/ Patch autogenerated by refactor_gimple.py from https://github.com/davidmalcolm/gcc-refactoring-scripts revision 74cd3d5f06565c318749d0fb9f35b565dae28daa [ ... ] This is fine with the usual conditions. diff --git a/gcc/gimple

Re: [PATCH 4/6] Implement is_a_helper <>::test specializations for various gimple types

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: * gimple.h (is_a_helper ::test): New. (is_a_helper ::test): New. (is_a_helper ::test): New. (is_a_helper ::test): New. OK with the usual conditions. Check with Andrew as to the location of these helpers since he's in the mi

Re: [PATCH 5/6] Port various places from union access to subclass access.

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: diff --git a/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c b/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c index 4f31b83..2555dbe 100644 --- a/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c +++ b/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c @@ -129,13 +129,14 @@ input_gimple_stmt (struct lto_input_block *ib, struct data_in *data_in,

Re: [PATCH 6/6] Update gdb hooks to reflect changes to gimple types

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/ * gdbhooks.py (GimplePrinter.to_string): Update lookup of code field to reflect inheritance, rather than embedding of the base gimple type. Conditionally approved. Obvious condition is the other 5 patches get approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Conversion of gimple types to C++ inheritance (v3)

On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote: The following series of patches convert it to a C++ hierarchy, using the existing structs, eliminating the union. The "gimple" typedef changes from being a (union gimple_statement_d *) to being a: (struct gimple_statement_base *) There are no virtua

Re: [PATCH] Add gimple subclasses for every gimple code (was Re: [PATCH 0/6] Conversion of gimple types to C++ inheritance (v3))

On 11/08/13 12:02, David Malcolm wrote: I wouldn't mind seeing a small example proof of concept posted to help those who don't see where this is going understand the goal. I would recommend against posting another large patch for inclusion at this time. Attached is a proof-of-concept patch whic

Re: [PATCH] Avoid duplicate calls to REG_PARM_STACK_SPACE

On 11/11/13 07:33, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Hello, this is another tweak to the middle-end to help support the new powerpc64le-linux ABI. In the new ABI, we make a distinction between functions that pass all arguments solely in registers, and those that do not. Only when calling one the latter ty

Re: [PATCH] Fix failing assertion in calls.c:store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos

On 11/11/13 07:32, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Hello, when implementing the new ABI for powerpc64le-linux, I ran into an assertion failure in store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos: gcc_assert (args[i].partial % UNITS_PER_WORD == 0); This can happen in the new ABI since we pass "homogene

Re: [PATCH] Do not set flag_complex_method to 2 for C++ by default.

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Cong Hou wrote: > This patch is for PR58963. > > In the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00560.html, > the builtin function is used to perform complex multiplication and > division. This is to comply with C99 standard, but I am wondering if > C++

Re: [PATCH][1-3] New configure option to enable Position independent executable as default.

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote: This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie. >>> >

Re: [PATCH][1-3] New configure option to enable Position independent executable as default.

On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote: >>> This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie. >> >> Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one c

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] ELFv2 ABI 1/8: Add options and infrastructure

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:33:46PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > Well, we had been thinking about this, but right now it seems we're not > > going to be able to make that change throughout the ecosystem quickly > > enough, so for now, it'll probably

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

On 11/13/2013, 5:48 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos on the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always important for generated code performance. LRA has

Re: [PATCH] Introducing SAD (Sum of Absolute Differences) operation to GCC vectorizer.

Ping? thanks, Cong On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Cong Hou wrote: > Hi James > > Sorry for the late reply. > > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 2:55 AM, James Greenhalgh > wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Cong Hou wrote: >>> > Thank you for your detailed explanation. >>> > >>> > Once GC

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

On 11/13/2013, 8:34 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Vladimir Makarov wrote: PR rtl-optimization/59036 * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq. (sorted_copies): New static var. (allo

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

> Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > > PR rtl-optimization/59036 > > * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members > > first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq. > > (sorted_copies): New static var. > > (allocnos_conflict_by_live_ranges_p

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

On 11/13/2013, 12:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: 2013-11-13 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimization/59036 * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq. (sorted_copies): New static var. (allo

[PATCH] Do not set flag_complex_method to 2 for C++ by default.

This patch is for PR58963. In the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00560.html, the builtin function is used to perform complex multiplication and division. This is to comply with C99 standard, but I am wondering if C++ also needs this. There is no complex keyword in C++, and no

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Add lp64 to target requirements of new IRA shrink wrapping preparation testcases

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:41:54PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code >> > were not intended for -m32 on x86_6

Re: [PATCH][1-3] New configure option to enable Position independent executable as default.

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote: >> This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie. > > Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one can do this and just do > it without the configure option. I

RE: [PATCH, i386] Fix -mpreferred-stack-boundary

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:50:27, Sriraman Tallam wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:30:16, Sriraman Tallam wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Uros B

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] ELFv2 ABI preparation: Refactor rs6000_function_arg

* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_psave_function_arg): New function. (rs6000_finish_function_arg): Likewise. (rs6000_function_arg): Use rs6000_psave_function_arg and rs6000_finish_function_arg to handle both vector and floating point arguments that are also passed in GPRs / the stack. This is okay,

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

Vladimir Makarov wrote: > PR rtl-optimization/59036 > * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members > first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq. > (sorted_copies): New static var. > (allocnos_conflict_by_live_ranges_p, copy_freq_co

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Add lp64 to target requirements of new IRA shrink wrapping preparation testcases

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:41:54PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > Hi, > > > > the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code > > were not intended for -m32 on x86_64 and should not be tested with it, > > thus I'm adding lp64 t

Re: [PATCH] Optional alternative base_expr in finding basis for CAND_REFs

Hi Bill, On 11/13/13 20:54, Bill Schmidt wrote: Hi Yufeng, The second version of your original patch is ok with me with the following changes. Sorry for the little side adventure into the next-interp logic; in the end that's going to hurt more than it helps in this case. Thanks for having a l

gimple-ssa-isolate-paths comment fix

Committed, obvious. * gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (pass_isolate_erroneous_paths): Comment fix. Index: gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c === --- gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (revision 204761) +++ gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (working cop

Re: [PATCH][1-3] New configure option to enable Position independent executable as default.

On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote: > This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie. Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one can do this and just do it without the configure option. Is there some reason that we need an option for it?

[wide-int] Fix memory stomper in dwarf

This fixes a memory stomper that Kenny found. This also improves the code in the face of vector of partial ints... diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.c b/gcc/dwarf2out.c index acee2000..ab8852f 100644 --- a/gcc/dwarf2out.c +++ b/gcc/dwarf2out.c @@ -3163,7 +3163,7 @@ static void add_AT_location_descriptio

[PATCH][PR middle-end/59119] Avoid referencing released SSA_NAMEs

We have a known API wart with the SSA_NAME manager. Specifically, once you start releasing names, you can't have dangling references (say in unreachable blocks) and allococate new names. The erroneous path optimization could run afoul of that requirement as it removed statements after an ex

Re: patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos on > the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always important > for generated code performance. LRA has a mechanism of allocating pseudos > by thread

Re: [PATCH] Fix failing assertion in calls.c:store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos

On 11/11/13 12:10, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Jeff Law wrote: On 11/11/13 07:32, Ulrich Weigand wrote: However, looking more closely, it seems store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos is not really useful for PARALLEL arguments in the first place. What this routine does is load arguments into args[i]

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 18:29 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:25:06AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote: > > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc: Temporarily > > > ifdef out almost the whole source. > > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common_syscalls.inc: Li

[PATCH][1-3] New configure option to enable Position independent executable as default.

Hi This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie. With the new option enable will make it pass -fPIE and -pie from the gcc and g++ frontend. Have only add the support for two targets but should work on more targes. In configure.ac we add the new option. We can't compile the

Re: [patch 1/3] Create gimple-iterator.h and gimple-walk.[ch]

On 11/13/13 07:46, Andrew MacLeod wrote: This set of 3 patches creates gimple-iterator.h to hold the prototypes for the existing gimple-iterator.c. It also extracts the gimple-stmt 'walker' routines into their own file. I didn't originally intend to do that, but I discovered that the include dep

[PATCH] Time profiler - phase 2

Hello, this patch introduces new function reordering feature that is based on the patch I submitted few days ago. The idea of a new flag (-fprofile-reorder-functions) is to reorder functions according to the first execution in instrumented run. Of course, the option operates only in LTO mode, w

Re: [PATCH, ia64] [PR target/57491] internal compiler error: in ia64_split_tmode -O2, quadmath

On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 11:38 +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Hello, > > On 07 Nov 15:42, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > Could you pls take a look? > > Ping? > > -- > Thanks, K Looks OK to me, go ahead and check it in. Steve Ellcey sell...@mips.com

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR ipa/58862 (overflow in edge_badness computation)

> The following fixes PR ipa/58862, which caused failures in lto > profiledbootstrap and in several spec cpu2006 profile-use builds. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64-unknown-linux-gnu. Also ensured that > it fixed the lto profiledbootstrap and cpu2006 failures. Ok for trunk? > > Thanks, > Te

Re: [PATCH] decide edge's hotness when there is profile info

> Ok, that sounds good. Here is the new patch. Is this ok for trunk if > testing (bootstrap regression and lto profiledbootstrap) succeeds? > > Thanks, > Teresa > > 2013-11-13 Teresa Johnson > > * predict.c (drop_profile): Error is currently too strict. > (handle_missing_profi

Re: XFAIL a couple of gnat.dg testcases on MIPS

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> They are reported as failing with the n32 ABI, but the failures are spurious. >> >> Tested on mips64el-linux-gnu, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch. >> >> >> 2012-10-21 Eric Botcazou

Re: Add __auto_type C extension, use it in

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > I have no idea, but does anyone knows if other free compilers (notably > Clang/LLVM) are adding a similar feature? I looked at the list of Clang language extensions before adding this one and didn't see mention of anything similar as a C languag

Re: [PATCH] Optional alternative base_expr in finding basis for CAND_REFs

Hi Yufeng, The second version of your original patch is ok with me with the following changes. Sorry for the little side adventure into the next-interp logic; in the end that's going to hurt more than it helps in this case. Thanks for having a look at it, anyway. Thanks also for cleaning up thi

Re: Add __auto_type C extension, use it in

On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:39 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Joseph S. Myers > wrote: > > contains what C11 describes as "generic functions". > > Although DR#419 makes clear that users cannot #undef these macros (or > > otherwise suppress use of a macro definition)

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Add lp64 to target requirements of new IRA shrink wrapping preparation testcases

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code > were not intended for -m32 on x86_64 and should not be tested with it, > thus I'm adding lp64 to the target requirements. > > Let me also briefly mention that I wou

Re: XFAIL a couple of gnat.dg testcases on MIPS

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > They are reported as failing with the n32 ABI, but the failures are spurious. > > Tested on mips64el-linux-gnu, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch. > > > 2012-10-21 Eric Botcazou > > * gnat.dg/specs/atomic1.ads: XFAIL on MIPS.

Re: [PATCH] Optional alternative base_expr in finding basis for CAND_REFs

Hi Yufeng, On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 19:32 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote: > Hi Bill, > > On 11/13/13 18:04, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > Hi Yufeng, > > > > On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote: > >> Hi Bill, > >> > >> Many thanks for the review. > >> > >> I find your suggestion on using the n

Re: [PATCH] Optional alternative base_expr in finding basis for CAND_REFs

Hi Bill, On 11/13/13 18:04, Bill Schmidt wrote: Hi Yufeng, On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote: Hi Bill, Many thanks for the review. I find your suggestion on using the next_interp field quite enlightening. I prepared a patch which adds changes without modifying the framew

Re: [PATCH] Fix *anddi_2 (PR target/59101)

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 06:38:00PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2013-11-12 11:31:31.0 +0100 >> > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2013-11-13 10:14:10.981609589 +0100 >> > @@ -7978,7 +7978,12 @@ (define

[PATCH] fix PR sanitizer/58994 on darwin via correct linkage

passes481 # of unsupported tests 132 === g++ Summary === # of expected passes962 # of unsupported tests 264 /sw/src/fink.build/gcc49-4.9.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../xg++ version 4.9.0 20131113 (experimental) (GCC

Re: Add __auto_type C extension, use it in

On Nov 12, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > with a single evaluation. To achieve this, this patch adds a new GNU > C extension __auto_type, Nice, I like it.

Re: [PATCH] Fix *anddi_2 (PR target/59101)

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 06:38:00PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2013-11-12 11:31:31.0 +0100 > > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2013-11-13 10:14:10.981609589 +0100 > > @@ -7978,7 +7978,12 @@ (define_insn "*anddi_2" > > (const_int 0))) > > (set (

Re: [PATCH] Optional alternative base_expr in finding basis for CAND_REFs

Hi Yufeng, On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Many thanks for the review. > > I find your suggestion on using the next_interp field quite > enlightening. I prepared a patch which adds changes without modifying > the framework. With the patch, the slsr pass

patch to implement thread coloring in IRA

The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos on the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always important for generated code performance. LRA has a mechanism of allocating pseudos by threads. Thread in LRA is a set of non-conflicting pseudos connect

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:25:06AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote: > On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 00:49 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > 2013-11-12 Jakub Jelinek > > > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc: Temporarily > > ifdef out almost the whole source. > > * sanitizer_com

Re: [PATCH] Generate a label for the split cold function while using -freorder-blocks-and-partition

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Cary Coutant wrote: Is there a format for compiler-defined labels that would not be able to clash with other user-generated labels? >>> >>> My understanding is that the "." in the generated name ensures that it >>> will not clash with user-generated labe

Re: [PATCH 2/3] libstdc++-v3: ::tmpnam depends on uClibc SUSV4_LEGACY

On 13 November 2013 09:22, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On 11 November 2013 12:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> How does __UCLIBC_SUSV4_LEGACY__ get defined? We'd have a problem if >> users defined that at configure time but not later when using the >> library. > That would be defined by uClibc

Re: [patch] [arm] ARM Cortex-M3/M4 tuning

On 11/12/2013 10:20 PM, Joey Ye wrote: > Janis, can you please take a look at test case changes. > > Thanks, > Joey They look fine. Janis >> -Original Message- >> From: Ramana Radhakrishnan >> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 17:11 >> To: Joey Ye >> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; jani...@c

[patch] Fix ICEs when DEBUG_MANGLE is enabled

This patch fixes a few ICEs I encountered when enabling DEBUG_MANGLE. I've also changed dump_substitution_candidates to output the substitution index in base 36, to match the actual mangled name. OK for trunk? -cary 2013-11-13 Cary Coutant gcc/ * cp/mangle.c (to_base36): New functio

Re: [PATCH] Fix *anddi_2 (PR target/59101)

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > If *anddi_2 is used with 64-bit integer constant that matches > "Z" constraint, but has bit 31 set, we emit it as andl instead, > but that is wrong unless just ZF is tested in the flags, because > SF might be different (if operands[1] has bi

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 00:49 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > 2013-11-12 Jakub Jelinek > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc: Temporarily > ifdef out almost the whole source. > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common_syscalls.inc: Likewise. That helps, but as Pat

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:45:54AM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: >> Many thanks, Jakub. >> >> I don't want to appear in this situation again. >> Would you suggest a place to create a wiki page which would list all >> required steps to te

Re: [RFA][PATCH] Isolate erroneous paths optimization

Jeff Law wrote: > * Makefile.in (OBJS): Add gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.o > * common.opt (-fisolate-erroneous-paths): Add option and > documentation. > * gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c: New file. This causes compiler segfaults for me when building Python 2.7.5. See http://gcc.gnu

Re: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:45:54AM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > Many thanks, Jakub. > > I don't want to appear in this situation again. > Would you suggest a place to create a wiki page which would list all > required steps to test libsanitizer? > > libsanitizer is (unfortunately) a very sys

Re: [PATCH] Merge cgraph_get_create_node and cgraph_get_create_real_symbol_node

Hello! > as discussed with Honza on many occasions, all users of > cgraph_get_create_node really want cgraph_get_create_real_symbol_node, > i.e. they are not interested in inline nodes and should get a > standalone node instead. So this patch changes cgraph_get_create_node > to do what cgraph_get

Re: [gomp4 simd, RFC] Simple fix to override vectorization cost estimation.

I will get some tests. As for cost analysis - simply consider the pragma as a request to vectorize. How can I - as a developer - enforce it beyond the pragma? On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Sergey Ostanevich wrote: > >> The reason patch was in its o

[PATCH] Fix *anddi_2 (PR target/59101)

Hi! If *anddi_2 is used with 64-bit integer constant that matches "Z" constraint, but has bit 31 set, we emit it as andl instead, but that is wrong unless just ZF is tested in the flags, because SF might be different (if operands[1] has bit 31 set, then SF from andl will be set, but for the 64-bit

Re: [patch] [arm] New option for PIC offset unfixed

On 13/11/13 15:57, Joey Ye wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Richard Earnshaw >> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 19:17 >> To: Joey Ye >> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: Re: [patch] [arm] New option for PIC offset unfixed >> >> On 13/11/13 10:20, Joey Ye wrote: > +

Ping Re: Clean up configure glibc version detection, add --with-glibc-version

Ping. This patch is pending review (build system or global reviewer). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: [PATCH, i386]: AMD bdver4 enablement

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote: > The attached patch (bd4-enablement.patch) enables the next version of AMD's > core. > New addition to the ISA (AVX2 and BMI2) are enabled for the new core. > Presently, the tuning is mostly copied from bdver3. This includes the

Re: Add __auto_type C extension, use it in

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > > +In GNU C, but not GNU C++, you may also declare the type of a variable > > +as @code{__auto_type}. In that case, the declaration must declare > > +only one variable, > > What's the reason for

Re: [testsuite] Fix gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-[45].c tests on Solaris 10+

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Rainer Orth wrote: > The following patch fixes this. Tested by the appropriate runtest > invocation on i386-pc-solaris2.10, ok for mainline? OK. The _POSIX_C_SOURCE definition was intended to allow for any systems whose system headers don't like pthreads in strict ISO C mo

[gomp4, WIP] Elementals improvements

Hi! Here is my latest elemental tweaks patch. While the patch has code to pass some argument in multiple vector arguments, it doesn't have something similar for return types. A lot of decisions whether to create elemental clone is done in a target hook (because, as long as we pass arguments in ve

Re: [PATCH] Fix infinite recursion between store_fixed_bit_field/store_split_bit_field with STRICT_ALIGNMENT

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Julian Brown wrote: > * gcc.dg/packed-struct-mode-1.c: New. I think this should be a torture test rather than specifying -O2, and should declare malloc itself rather than using . -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

RE: [patch] [arm] New option for PIC offset unfixed

This patch address all comments. Thanks, Joey > -Original Message- > From: Richard Earnshaw > Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 19:07 > To: Joey Ye > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [patch] [arm] New option for PIC offset unfixed > > On 13/11/13 10:20, Joey Ye wrote: > >>> +@

RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR bootstrap/58951

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > This worked for me and I checked it in. Gerald, please let me know if > you still have issues. Thanks Balaji and H.J. -- my tester successfully bootstrapped again (for the first time this month). Gerald

Re: [PATCH, libiberty]: Add a couple of missing casts

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> > > >> > > This was uncovered by x86 lto-profiledbootstrap. The patch allows >> > > lto-profiledboo

Re: Add __auto_type C extension, use it in

Hi, On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > +In GNU C, but not GNU C++, you may also declare the type of a variable > +as @code{__auto_type}. In that case, the declaration must declare > +only one variable, What's the reason for this restriction? I can't see what would become ambiguous

Re: [v3] Missing uglification

Hi, On 11/13/2013 03:40 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: Bootstrap and testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok, thanks. If you like I think the patch is safe for 4.8.3 too. The main other issue in that PR will require a UDL specialist. Let's ping Ed, then. Thanks, Paolo.

Re: [PATCH, PR 10474] Take two on splitting live-ranges of function arguments to help shrink-wrapping

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > last Thursday I had to revert a previous version of this patch because > it has caused a lot of trouble on various platforms I did not test it > on. The patch is still very similar to its previous iteration > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gc

[AArch64] [-mtune cleanup 4/5] Remove "example-1", "example-2" tuning options.

Hi, "example-1" and "example-2" provide a "large"-like tuning option and a "small"-like tuning option. Now that we have wired up tuning for "cortex-a57" and "cortex-a53" we no longer need these options. Remove them. Tested in series on aarch64-none-elf with no regressions. OK? Thanks, James

[AArch64] [-mtune cleanup 3/5] [Temporary] When asked to tune for Cortex-A57, tune for Cortex-A15

Hi, We do not yet have a pipeline model for Cortex-A57. The most sensible thing we can use to generate pipeline schedules is another "big"-like processor. For that we can use the Cortex-A15 model. Tested in series on aarch64-none-elf with no regressions. OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2013-11-1

[AArch64] [-mtune cleanup 2/5] Tune for Cortex-A53 by default.

Hi, This patch makes Cortex-A53 the processor we choose to tune for in the following situations: * No -mtune, -mcpu or -march * -march=armv8-a * -mtune/cpu=generic * -mtune/cpu=cortex-a15 That is to say, we will tune for cortex-a53 by default. This seems the pragmatic choice as we curr

[AArch64] [-mtune cleanup 5/5] Update invoke.texi

Hi, This patch finishes the series, updating invoke.texi to reflect the options supported by -mtune and -mcpu. Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2013-11-13 James Greenhalgh * doc/invoke.texi: Update documentation for AArch64's -mcpu and -mtune options. diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi

[AArch64] [-mtune cleanup 1/5] Remove -march=generic.

Hi, This option was never documented anywhere, is meaningless and generates unhelpful code. Better we remove it. Tested on aarch64-none-elf in series with no regressions. OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2013-11-13 James Greenhalgh * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (all_architectures): Remove

[AArch64] [0/5 -mtune cleanup] Update options for -mtune.

Hi, This patch series performs a number of cleanups to the -mtune/-mcpu/-march infrastructure for AArch64. Our goals are: * Remove the example pipeline models. * Tune for Cortex-A53 by default. * Provide sensible tuning for Cortex-A57. The patches which implement these goals are: [AArch

Re: [PATCH, libiberty]: Add a couple of missing casts

Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > This was uncovered by x86 lto-profiledbootstrap. The patch allows > > > lto-profiledbootstrap to proceed further. > > > > > > 2013-11-12 Uros Bizj

[PATCH, testsuite] Add lp64 to target requirements of new IRA shrink wrapping preparation testcases

Hi, the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code were not intended for -m32 on x86_64 and should not be tested with it, thus I'm adding lp64 to the target requirements. Let me also briefly mention that I would like to make the testcases also run on ppc64 and therefore I did

[testsuite] Fix gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-[45].c tests on Solaris 10+

Two of the new gcc.dg/atomic tests were failing to compile on Solaris 10+: FAIL: gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-4.c -O0 (test for excess errors) Excess errors: /var/gcc/regression/trunk/10-gcc/build/gcc/include-fixed/sys/feature_tests.h:346:2: error: #error "Compiler or options invalid for pre-U

Re: Recent Go patch broke Alpha bootstrap

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >>> panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference >>> [signal 0xb code=0x1 addr=0x1c] > >>> FAIL: runtime/pprof >>> gmake[2]: *** [runtime/pprof/check] Error 1 >>> >>> This one is new, I have to look into it a bit deepe

[PATCH] Fix infinite recursion between store_fixed_bit_field/store_split_bit_field with STRICT_ALIGNMENT

Hi, This patch addresses an issue where the compiler gets stuck in an infinite mutually-recursive loop between store_fixed_bit_field and store_split_bit_field. This affects versions back at least as far as 4.6 (or so). We observed this happening on PowerPC E500, but other targets may be affected t

[patch 3/3] Create gimple-iterator.h and gimple-walk.[ch] - config and testsuite

And finally the changes to the config and testsuite files. * config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c: Include gimple-iterator.h. * config/rs6000/rs6000.c: Include gimple-iterator.h and gimple-walk.h. * testsuite/g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c: Include gimple-iterator.h. * testsuite/gcc.dg/plugin/selfas

[patch 2/3] Create gimple-iterator.h and gimple-walk.[ch] - #include changes

This has the core compiler files #include changes * asan.c: Update Include list as required for gimple-iterator.h and gimple-walk.h. * cfgexpand.c: Likewise. * cfgloop.c: Likewise. * cfgloopmanip.c: Likewise. * cgraph.c: Likewise. * cgraphbuild.c: Likewise. * cgraphunit.c: Likewise. *

[PATCH] Fix PR ipa/58862 (overflow in edge_badness computation)

The following fixes PR ipa/58862, which caused failures in lto profiledbootstrap and in several spec cpu2006 profile-use builds. Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64-unknown-linux-gnu. Also ensured that it fixed the lto profiledbootstrap and cpu2006 failures. Ok for trunk? Thanks, Teresa 2013-11-13

Re: [PATCH] decide edge's hotness when there is profile info

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> More info on the lto bootstrap failure: >> >> >> >> /usr/local/google/home/tejohnson/gcc_trunk_9/libiberty/pex-unix.c:790:1: >> >> warning: Missing counts for called function pex_child

[v3] Missing uglification

Bootstrap and testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. The main other issue in that PR will require a UDL specialist. 2013-11-13 Marc Glisse PR libstdc++/59087 * include/ext/pod_char_traits.h: Uglify V, I and S. -- Marc GlisseIndex: include/ext/pod_char_traits.h ===

Re: [PATCH] Add check for aarch64 in vect_cmdline_needed

On 7 November 2013 15:20, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > On 11/6/13, 5:06 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > >> You should be testing aarch64*-*-* so as to match aarch64_be targets. > > Thank you for catching that. Please commit this new patch if is OK. I > don't have SVN access. Applied as 204745 thanks.

Re: [buildrobot] [PATCH] c6x.c: `mark_addressable' not declared

On 11/13/2013 06:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: Hi Andrew! Some fallout for tic6x-uclinux: g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qu

Re: [patch 3/4] Separate gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch] - front end files

On 11/13/2013 04:40 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: This one covers the front end files which included gimple.h Bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no new regressions. OK? * c-family/c-omp.c: Include gimple-expr.h instead of g

Re: Some wide-int review comments

Kenneth Zadeck writes: >> From fold-const.c: >> >> @@ -13686,14 +13548,17 @@ fold_binary_loc (location_t loc, >>break; >> } >> >> -else if (TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (arg1) == signed_max_hi >> - && TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1) == signed_max_lo >> +

  1   2   >