Jerry DeLisle wrote:
The attached patch sets the create flag for the case where action is specified
as read only.
Regression tested on x86-64 Linux.
OK for trunk?
OK. Thanks for the patch!
Tobias
2013-11-15 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/59108
* io/unix.c (regular_file): If
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 7:41 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Patches
> Subject: cilking away
>
> Kenny reported that the library name is mixed into the test case name. This
> is wrong.
As far as I can tell, libsanitizer works on hppa-linux. So, the
change could be added to the llvm tree.
However, I'm unlikely to test anything in the tree unless someone
tells me there's something to test.
Dave
On 15-Nov-13, at 10:52 PM, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
Dave,
Do you want the
Dave,
Do you want the asan/asan_linux.cc (# elif defined(__hppa__)) part to
be in the llvm tree?
--kcc
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:55 AM, John David Anglin wrote:
> On 15-Nov-13, at 9:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2
> "Joseph" == Joseph S Myers writes:
Joseph> Any comments on whether we should consider the Unicode character data
Joseph> - UnicodeData.txt and DerivedNormalizationProps.txt, a total of about
Joseph> 2MB - as source code for the generated ucnid.h that should be checked
Joseph> into the repos
On 11/15/13 15:05, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Why all this, and not keep everything but
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_SIMD and GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_DISTRIBUTE
as they were, and just use:
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_DISTIRBUTE = 1 << 0,
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_SIMD = 2 << 0,
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_CILKSIMD = 3 << 0,
Sounds
Kenny reported that the library name is mixed into the test case name. This is
wrong. This fixes it. I also trimmed -O0, as redundant and added support for
C++ runtime tests, once you guys want to add one.
The CK tests should either be made to work in C++ land, or moved to
gcc.dg/cilk-plus.
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:09:02, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>>
>>> Currently on trunk the option -mpreferred-stack-boundary does not
>>> work
>>> together with #pra
On 15-Nov-13, at 9:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:25 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 00:49 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
2013-11-12 Jakub Jelinek
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platf
Hi,
committed to mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
///
2013-11-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58188
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template8.C: New.
2013-11-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58725
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template7.C: New.
2013-11-15 Paolo Carlini
When testing with -freorder-blocks-and-partition enabled, I hit a
verification failure in an LTO profiledbootstrap. Edge forwarding
performed when we went into cfg layout mode after bb reordering
(during compgotos) created a situation where a hot block was then
dominated by a cold block and was the
Hi,
fixed by a recent patch of mine, committed to mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-11-15 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/58599
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template5.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template5.C
===
Hi,
sh4-unknown-linux-gnu fails to build during compiling libobjc:
/exp/ldroot/dodes/ORIG/trunk/libobjc/encoding.c: In function
'objc_alignof_type':
/exp/ldroot/dodes/ORIG/trunk/libobjc/encoding.c:620:1: internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault
}
^
0x860f910 crash_signal
../../ORIG
> "Richard" == Richard Biener writes:
Richard> If it reduces peak disk usage yes. These don't, no? That said, we
Richard> could also 'fix' the dependencies at that point?
That seems to defeat the purpose of having the dependencies.
Really it's been a bug that these dependencies were omitted
> "Jeff" == Jeff Law writes:
Jeff> But isn't the whole point of bootstrap-lean to remove those
Jeff> directories during the build?
Yeah, but I think they are still mostly removed.
We just keep the "last previous" stage around for the benefit of
"install".
It's possible I'm missing something
Why all this, and not keep everything but
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_SIMD and GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_DISTRIBUTE
as they were, and just use:
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_DISTIRBUTE = 1 << 0,
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_SIMD = 2 << 0,
GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_CILKSIMD = 3 << 0,
Sounds good. Testing the following patch against
Jeff Law wrote:
>On 11/15/13 11:26, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> PR bootstrap/58572 was inadvertently caused by the automatic
>dependency
>> patch series.
>>
>> The symptoms are that "make bootstrap-lean" will cause a subsequent
>> "make install" to fail.
>>
>> The bug is that the automatic dependency cod
Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> The issue is in __gcc_qadd implementation at
> libgcc/config/rs6000/ibm-ldouble.c,
> if the number if non finite, there is not check if it a NaN before actually
> summing all the components. A possible solution would be to add an extra test
> and return the first sum
> --- a/gcc/gimple.h
> +++ b/gcc/gimple.h
> @@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ enum gf_mask {
> GF_CALL_ALLOCA_FOR_VAR = 1 << 5,
> GF_CALL_INTERNAL = 1 << 6,
> GF_OMP_PARALLEL_COMBINED = 1 << 0,
> -GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_MASK = 3 << 0,
> +GF_OMP_FOR_KIND_MASK = 7,
> GF_OMP
On 11/15/13 12:23, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
This patch is dependent on the following patches:
#pragma simd work (they both share the same parser routines)
I have just committed this to trunk, so it shouldn't be a blocker.
Also, in the past 2 days the #pragma simd parsing has been merged with
t
On 11/15/2013 01:05 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
>> The attached patch sets the create flag for the case where action is
>> specified
>> as read only.
>
> I was looking at this yesterday, but didn't have time to finish
> everything then. So I
Yes, OpenMP user defined reductions are allowed.
In which case, there are no further changes to the C++ parser. The
committed version is correct.
Thanks for looking into this Balaji.
Aldy
Andrew Pinski created a patch for PR 56552 some months ago but has not
checked it in. I would like to go ahead and check it in so that it gets
into GCC 4.9. I have tested this on MIPS with no regressions.
OK to checkin?
Steve Ellcey
sell...@mips.com
2013-11-15 Andrew Pinski
Stev
On 11/15/13 11:26, Tom Tromey wrote:
PR bootstrap/58572 was inadvertently caused by the automatic dependency
patch series.
The symptoms are that "make bootstrap-lean" will cause a subsequent
"make install" to fail.
The bug is that the automatic dependency code is picking up in-tree
dependencies
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 01:26:54PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Jakub asked whether it would be possible to extend backtrace_syminfo to
> work for variables as well as functions. It's a straightforward
> extension, implemented by this patch. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace
> tests on x86_64
On Thu, 7 Nov 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
> > And the libatomic tests shouldn't have been
> > restricted to targets with hardware sync_* support, or adding
> > command-line options to make such support available,
>
> For this I'd like a domain expert to weigh in. If that is you, then you
> can chec
Jakub asked whether it would be possible to extend backtrace_syminfo to
work for variables as well as functions. It's a straightforward
extension, implemented by this patch. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace
tests on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Any comments on this patch before I
submit it?
Ian
On 11/15/13 12:41, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/15/2013 01:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/15/13 09:47, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This patch finally gets gimple.h into its proper state of only having
prototypes for gimple.c.
The prototype for get_base_address was in tree.h, and it seemed more
appropri
Based on comments from Richi. This patch tweaks
has_abnormal_outgoing_edge to also check for EDGE_EH and changes the
name in the obvious way.
This allows part of patch for 59127 to go away -- specifically we don't
have to check stmt_ends_bb_p and explicitly filter out GIMPLE_RETURN.
Bootstr
On 11/15/2013 10:44 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Anyway, for the time being, the problem filed in 29143 is only about
OVERLOADs, not about FUNCTION_DECLs, which are already fine, thus I'm
wondering if we could instead apply something like attached (+ a
comment). What do you think?
Makes sense.
Jas
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> The attached patch sets the create flag for the case where action is specified
> as read only.
I was looking at this yesterday, but didn't have time to finish
everything then. So I made a similar patch, which also takes into
account the case
Greetings,
I've reverted r203873 and r203036 in r204860 on google/gcc-4_8 branch.
The r203036 changes output of std::sort when input has equivalent
elements, and this breaks "golden output" tests, which we'll need to
clean up.
Thanks,
--
Paul Pluzhnikov
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> This patch adds support for -fsanitize=leak and -static-liblsan options.
> If combined with -fsanitize=address, it does nothing, otherwise it links
> in liblsan, a new shared+static library (on x86_64-linux only so far,
> the code isn't 32
Hi!
This patch adds support for -fsanitize=leak and -static-liblsan options.
If combined with -fsanitize=address, it does nothing, otherwise it links
in liblsan, a new shared+static library (on x86_64-linux only so far,
the code isn't 32-bit ready apparently).
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-lin
On 11/15/2013 01:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/15/13 09:47, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This patch finally gets gimple.h into its proper state of only having
prototypes for gimple.c.
The prototype for get_base_address was in tree.h, and it seemed more
appropriate there since gimple.h is for gimple sta
> -Original Message-
> From: Aldy Hernandez [mailto:al...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 12:39 PM
> To: Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: Jason Merrill; gcc-patches; Iyer, Balaji V
> Subject: Re: PING: Fwd: Re: [patch] implement Cilk Plus simd loops on trunk
>
> On 11/14/13 10:05, Jak
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:17:49PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> >> Why can't we create the redzone of max(32, alignment) bytes?
>> >
>> > Because it is it is expensive, consider say a 2048 byte aligned variable,
>> Do these happen?
The attached patch sets the create flag for the case where action is specified
as read only.
I have confirmed that the PR test case now only produces:
open("wombat", O_RDONLY)= 3
open("numbat", O_RDONLY)= 4
open("dingbat", O_RDONLY) = 5
+++ exited wit
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:34:28PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> +samsonov, who wrote the clang part
>>
>> Do you plan to add tests?
>
> OT, what is the -fsanitize=address,use-after-scope doing? Tried that
> and it didn't seem to d
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A previous patch of mine was misguided. It modified the altivec_vperm_*
> patterns to use the little endian conversion trick of reversing the
> input operands and complementing the permute control vector.
>
> Looking at the Altivec m
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:34:28PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> +samsonov, who wrote the clang part
>>
>> Do you plan to add tests?
>
> Eventually yes, but likely only in stage3, there is only limited time
> left during stage1 and
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:34:28PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> +samsonov, who wrote the clang part
>
> Do you plan to add tests?
OT, what is the -fsanitize=address,use-after-scope doing? Tried that
and it didn't seem to do anything at all, besides adding some extra
start/end scope mark
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:34:28PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> +samsonov, who wrote the clang part
>
> Do you plan to add tests?
Eventually yes, but likely only in stage3, there is only limited time
left during stage1 and I need to still work on OpenMP elementals next week.
> We have f
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:17:49PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> >> Why can't we create the redzone of max(32, alignment) bytes?
> >
> > Because it is it is expensive, consider say a 2048 byte aligned variable,
> Do these happen?
They are supported and some programs do use them, perhaps le
+samsonov, who wrote the clang part
Do you plan to add tests?
We have four lit-style tests for this (Alexey, that's all, right?):
init-order-atexit.cc
init-order-dlopen.cc
init-order-pthread-create.cc
Linux/initialization-bug-any-order.cc
I think we need at least the basic one in gcc
(Linux/initi
On 11/15/13 09:47, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This patch finally gets gimple.h into its proper state of only having
prototypes for gimple.c.
The prototype for get_base_address was in tree.h, and it seemed more
appropriate there since gimple.h is for gimple statements. I moved the
function to tree.c
PR bootstrap/58572 was inadvertently caused by the automatic dependency
patch series.
The symptoms are that "make bootstrap-lean" will cause a subsequent
"make install" to fail.
The bug is that the automatic dependency code is picking up in-tree
dependencies that were omitted by the old manual de
On 11/15/13 02:36, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
This patch fixes two issues, the most important issue is the related to the
Ada build failures on the trunk.
When non-call-exceptions is on, most memory references potentially throw.
As a result those st
On 11/15/13 09:47, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Hello,
On 15 Nov 17:11, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
On 15 Nov 16:55, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Bootstrap (with Ada) is still in progress.
Passed for me (seems here is no Jeff's patch)
On recent trunk with patch applied, I've got:
/export/users/kyukhin/gcc/git/gcc/
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:46:25PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:12:07PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> >> I afraid it actually wants the
On 15/11/13 02:06, Cong Hou wrote:
> Hi
>
> This patch adds the support to two non-isomorphic operations addsub
> and subadd for SLP vectorizer. More non-isomorphic operations can be
> added later, but the limitation is that operations on even/odd
> elements should still be isomorphic. Once such a
On Nov 15, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Either you need to document all the semantics so as to make clear to users
>> exactly when they can use these functions safely, or you need to state
>> that there are undocumented restrictions that may change from GCC version
>> to GCC version a
Please ignore the email i just sent that looks like this.I
accidentally pushed the send button. it is not ready yet.
kenny
On 11/15/2013 12:49 PM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
On 11/08/2013 05:30 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Some comments from looking through the diff with the merge point,
ignor
2013/11/7 Jeff Law :
> On 11/07/13 04:50, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is an updated patch version.
>
> I think this needs to hold until we have a consensus on what the parameter
> passing looks like for bounded pointers.
With the new parameters passing model this patch is not needed.
We want to use -fPIC, not -fpic, for libgcc.a and crt{begin,end}S.o,
since they may be linked into a shared library with more then 32K of
GOT. Apart from libgcc only libiberty and libada are still using
_GCC_PICFLAG instead of libtool, so just remove the special case for
m68k. Tested on m68k-suse
Any more comments?
thanks,
Cong
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Cong Hou wrote:
> 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,
Ping.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
>> Before r193504, if a method can not be overridden, LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL
>> is set and the call is direct. The changes at r193504 (to fix PR
>> c++/11750) caused a reg
On 11/08/2013 05:30 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Some comments from looking through the diff with the merge point,
ignoring wide-int.h and wide-int.cc. A few more to follow in the
form of patchses.
dwarf2out.c has:
+case CONST_WIDE_INT:
+ if (mode == VOIDmode)
+
Hi,
A previous patch of mine was misguided. It modified the altivec_vperm_*
patterns to use the little endian conversion trick of reversing the
input operands and complementing the permute control vector.
Looking at the Altivec manual, we really can't do this. These patterns
need to be direct p
Hi Steve,
It certainly looks good to me and if it works on the intended targets,
it cannot be bad! OK for trunk.
Thanks for the patch
Paul
On 15 November 2013 18:33, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> A while back I checked in a Fortran configure patch that allowed me to build
> Fortran for the mips-mti
A while back I checked in a Fortran configure patch that allowed me to build
Fortran for the mips-mti-elf target. I used the same mechanism (checking
with_newlib) that libstdc++ and libjava use. This change broke the aarch64
Fortran build because that platform's newlib does not have strtold. I
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:34 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:35 PM, 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/ppr
Hello,
On 12 Nov 15:36, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> Patch in the bottom extends some hooks toward AVX-512 support.
> This patch decrease icount for Spec2006 FP suite (ref set):
>
> Optset was: -static -m64 -fstrict-aliasing -fno-prefetch-loop-arrays
> -Ofast -funroll-loops -flto -march=core-av
Hello,
On 06 Nov 10:27, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch introduces sae-only feature for
> structureless expands.
>
> Bootstrapped.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
Ping.
--
Thanks, K
Hello,
On 06 Nov 10:24, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Bootstrapped.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
Ping.
--
Thanks, K
Hello,
On 06 Nov 10:21, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Bootstrapped.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
Ping.
--
Thanks, K
Hello,
On 06 Nov 10:18, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Corrsponding subst implementation is in the bottom.
>
> Bootstrapped.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
Ping.
--
Thanks, K
Hello,
On 06 Nov 10:15, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Bootstrap pass.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
Ping.
--
Thanks, K
Helllo,
On 13 Nov 16:18, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Testing pass.
Ping?
--
Thanks, K
Hi,
The attached patch fixes all the reduc_* expansions to be BE-safe by moving the
scalar result to the LSB where RTL expects it. While moving it also adds
patterns that will give gcc the freedom to choose between 2-lane-situations like
ADDP Dd, Vd.2D
DUP Vd.2D, Vd.d[0]
and
ADDP Vd.2
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> I still see panic in runtime (trace below), segfault in sync,
>> database/sql, net/http and abort in sync/atomic on 32bit CentOS 5.10
>> library.
The problems on 32-bit are a recently introduced middle-end bug:
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR59099 .
On 11/15/13 09:47, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Hello,
On 15 Nov 17:11, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
On 15 Nov 16:55, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Bootstrap (with Ada) is still in progress.
Passed for me (seems here is no Jeff's patch)
On recent trunk with patch applied, I've got:
/export/users/kyukhin/gcc/git/gcc/
On 14 November 2013 17:20, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Now that every instruction has a "type" attribute associated with it,
> we don't need the "simd_type" or "simd_mode" attributes anymore. So,
> remove them.
>
> Regression tested for aarch64-none-elf with no regressions.
>
> OK?
OK /Ma
Hello,
On 15 Nov 17:11, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> On 15 Nov 16:55, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > Bootstrap (with Ada) is still in progress.
>
> Passed for me (seems here is no Jeff's patch)
On recent trunk with patch applied, I've got:
/export/users/kyukhin/gcc/git/gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/decl.c: In fun
This patch finally gets gimple.h into its proper state of only having
prototypes for gimple.c.
The prototype for get_base_address was in tree.h, and it seemed more
appropriate there since gimple.h is for gimple statements. I moved the
function to tree.c
2 new .h files were created, cfgexpa
> But that makes *no* sense when the trap is in the else block. The label
> has been deleted from the insn chain and more importantly, we want to
> fallthru if we do not trap!
>
> Thankfully the the CFG checking code detected this inconsistency. It's
> been latent since 2002! Clearly we aren't
Implement LWG 2187.
* include/bits/stl_bvector.h (vector::emplace_back()): LWG 2187:
Define.
(vector::emplace()): Likewise.
* testsuite/23_containers/vector/bool/emplace.cc: New.
Teted x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_bve
I've applied the attached patch to fix some of the typos in libstdc++
that were pointed out back in July.
Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 9219099336b3117a15ed1a9e21cbd6331abd532e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Fri Nov 15 16:08:59 2013 +
2013-11-15 Ondřej Bílka
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
> Or you move the macros depending on NO_DOLLARS_IN_LABELS
> to tm.h itself ...
I'm dubious about that for the front-end macros, but in some cases it may
indeed make sense to move a macro that depends on target macros, rather
than really being one itse
Hi,
On 11/12/2013 04:51 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Please add a comment citing 13.3.1.1. OK with that change.
Thanks. The patch is still unapplied, because there are some
interactions with access control (and bugs we have got about access
control) which make me a bit nervous. For example for a
Hi all,
This patch adds the rtx costs table for the Cortex-A53. It goes in the new
aarch-cost-tables.h file because we will want to share it with AArch64.
We add a corresponding tuning struct and set the tuning from generic cortex
tuning to the new one.
Tested arm-none-eabi on model.
Ok fo
On Fri, 2013-11-15 at 15:51 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > Ok, Dave reported in PR59009 that my last patch still left a few build
> > problems on HPPA. Dave tested the patch below and confirmed this cleans
>
> How can there be prob
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:24:36AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Looks like we need to wait on Intel to pontificate on whether UDRs
> are valid or not. Who knows...maybe no work at all! Woo hoo!
>
> How does this look?
Looks good to me, but please wait if Jason doesn't have any feedback too.
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:46:25PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:12:07PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> >> I afraid it actually wants the header (magic, descr, pc) to be in the
> >> first 3 words in
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 09:22:01AM +, Matthew Leach wrote:
> Martin Jambor writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:18:24PM +, Matthew Leach wrote:
> >> Martin Jambor writes:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >>
> >> Hi Martin,
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >
> >> > 2013-11-04 Martin J
> Sometimes 4 will be needed, since both original register values may
> remain live.
Indeed.
> However, I'm inclined to agree that while it should be possible to
> decide at the *function* level whether or not an insn is valid, doing so
> at the block level is probably unsafe.
Ok, so the attache
Jeff Law writes:
> On 11/14/13 13:46, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> pp_c_character_constant only calls pp_p_char for values that fit into
>> a HWI of the constant's signedness (i.e. an unsigned HWI if TYPE_UNSIGNED
>> and a signed HWI otherwise). But pp_c_character_constant is only called by:
>>
>>
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 08:16:47AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:25 -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
>
2013/11/15 Richard Biener :
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> On 15 Nov 18:12, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>> 2013/11/15 Richard Biener :
>>> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> Here is a patch to introduce builtin to bind bou
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:12:07PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> I afraid it actually wants the header (magic, descr, pc) to be in the
>> first 3 words in the
>> memory returned by __asan_stack_malloc_*
>> FakeStack::AddrIsInFakeStac
stores.
* gcc.dg/torture/20131115-1.c: New testcase.
Index: gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
===
--- gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c(revision 204787)
+++ gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c(working copy)
@@ -1723,8 +1723,7
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 15 Nov 18:12, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> 2013/11/15 Richard Biener :
>> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Here is a patch to introduce builtin to bind bounds for call arguments as
>> >> was
On 15 Nov 18:12, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2013/11/15 Richard Biener :
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Here is a patch to introduce builtin to bind bounds for call arguments as
> >> was discussed here
> >> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:12:07PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> I afraid it actually wants the header (magic, descr, pc) to be in the
> first 3 words in the
> memory returned by __asan_stack_malloc_*
> FakeStack::AddrIsInFakeStack(addr) returns the beginning of the allocated
> chunk
> and
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2013/11/15 Richard Biener :
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here is a patch to introduce builtin to bind bounds for call arguments as
>>> was discussed here
>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patche
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 02:56:51PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Now that there is (finally :() a wrong-code testcase for the
> > PR54570 issue we can no longer ignore it (bah). So the following
> > tries to paper over the fact that object-size sucks
David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> > Here's a patch to add documentation along the lines of what we have
> > for the longdouble switches.
> >
> > Doc build tested on powerpc64-linux.
> >
> > David, would that be OK for mainline, or do have other sug
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Sergey Ostanevich wrote:
> Richard,
>
> here's an example that causes trigger for the cost model.
I hardly believe that (AVX2)
.L9:
vmovups (%rsi), %xmm3
addl$1, %r8d
addq$256, %rsi
vinsertf128 $0x1, -240(%rsi), %ymm3, %ymm1
On 15/11/13 14:19, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm agree. I looked at the ARM backend and it occurs that the usage
> of optimize_insn_for_size_p() was added to only use store_minmax in
> cold path because of some performance issue. But in any case its
> usage doesn't shrink the number of instruct
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 06:06:24PM +0400, Sergey Ostanevich wrote:
> here's an example that causes trigger for the cost model. As soon as
> elemental functions will appear and we update the vectorizer so it can accept
> an elemental function inside the loop - we will have the same
> situation as we
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
