Here's a patch that is a little bit "quick & dirty". In BFS mode it's
not trivial to support ECMAScript's
"match from left to right". A quick solution is only using DFS for
ECMAScript. See the patch.
It is possible to support ECMAScript's "left to right" in BFS mode
(re2 does this), but I didn't s
On 06/06/2014 10:27 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/06/14 10:08 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
I'll look at rdbuf. Error in rdbuf? Do I need to do something?
No, just me being dumb. The ostream::operator<<(streambuf*) overload
behaves as an unformatted output function, so won't obey the paddi
PING
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the attached patch implements the idea in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-04/msg00258.html ; though it
> turned out it was much simpler than what I envisaged back then. With
> this patch, we no longer seek back and fort
PING #2
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
> PING
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Janne Blomqvist
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Janne Blomqvist
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> a common malloc() pattern is "malloc(num_foo * sizeof(foo_t)", that
>>> is, create
On 06/06/14 16:25, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> here is a new try on adding __float128 typeinfo to libsupc++. The front-end
>> part is based on the discussion with Jason yesterday. The libstdc++ part is
>> copied from:
>> https://
Apparently LTO improved or at least changed between r21 and
r211121, such that memory outside the defined space was wrongly read
as "expected" for this test-case, corresponding to the wrongly
presumed stacked parameters. For a "normal" target this would
correspond to a SEGV. You'd need the me
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> The pack01.c test fails on GCC 4.8 on little endian power8 systems. In looking
> at it, it is a bug where the V1TI memory operations do not have the word
> swapping define_split support. GCC 4.9 and trunk can optimize the union to
> stay i
Hi,
I will commit the attached patch.
Sebastian
From 32fa3756f5c41be16d92fd176ec5e42bfdcbb643 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Pop
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 15:56:33 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] update my email address
2014-06-06 Sebastian Pop
* MAINTAINERS: Update my email address.
---
Chang
On 6 June 2014 17:57, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 06/06/14 15:40, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> On 6 June 2014 01:32, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>>>
>>> Have these been tested for both big and little endian (especially for
>>> tests where memory layout matters - load / store / lane number tests -
> I’ve extended the logical warning to the NAMED, OPENED, and PENDING
> specifiers. I’ve also audited the integer specifiers, and extended the
> warning to NUMBER, NEXTREC, and RECL, which were missing.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-apple-darwin13, OK to commit?
Committed as rev. 211
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 09:38:06PM +0200, FX wrote:
> > It seems that some of these extensions are not caught by -std=f95
>
> I?ve now audited the I/O specifiers for such warnings too. A warning existed
> only for EXIST, which was introduced way back by Steve:
>
> > 2010-07-05 Steven G. Kargl
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 06:21:02PM +0200, FX wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Our Fortran 2003 status page [1] says gfortran does not support "Kind type
> parameters of integer specifiers?. This item is defined thusly (item 4.9 in
> [2]):
>
> > Some of the integer specifiers (e.g. NEXTREC) were limited to
> It seems that some of these extensions are not caught by -std=f95
I’ve now audited the I/O specifiers for such warnings too. A warning existed
only for EXIST, which was introduced way back by Steve:
> 2010-07-05 Steven G. Kargl
>
> PR fortran/44797
> * fortran/io.c (resolve
The pack01.c test fails on GCC 4.8 on little endian power8 systems. In looking
at it, it is a bug where the V1TI memory operations do not have the word
swapping define_split support. GCC 4.9 and trunk can optimize the union to
stay in a register, so the test case passes on those systems, but it is
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> DJ Delorie's work on __intN may be a good direction for __floatN as well, IIUC
> we will have a global list of 4 __intN types, and the target decides the value
> of N for each of them, so we can refer to those type nodes in common code but
> they are still
Hello!
Attached patch fixes PR 61423. The problem was that splitters omitted
apparently necessary zero extension, and left garbage in the highpart
of the register.
2014-06-06 Uros Bizjak
PR target/61423
* config/i386/i386.md (*floatunssi2_i387_with_xmm): New
define_insn_and_split
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 07:21:03PM +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
> DJ Delorie's work on __intN may be a good direction for __floatN as
> well, IIUC we will have a global list of 4 __intN types, and the
> target decides the value of N for each of them, so we can refer to
> those type nodes in common cod
On 2014-06-05, 8:37 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 08:00:51PM +0100, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
From my perspective, I think this should go in, and be backported to 4.9.
I've committed it as rev. 211320 for trunk and rev. 211319 for gcc-4.9
branch.
2014-06-06 Vladimir M
On June 6, 2014 7:15:55 PM CEST, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for all
>> languages including obj-c++, ada and go (yay), applied.
>
>Something went wrong because this nevertheless introduced a regression:
>
>FAIL: gnat.dg/aliasing3.adb execution test
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 06/06/2014 11:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
What's your rationale for keeping this in a separate version block
rather than in 1.3.9 (like __int128)?
Powerpc already has those symbols in CXXABI_LDBL_1.3 (for a t
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for all
> languages including obj-c++, ada and go (yay), applied.
Something went wrong because this nevertheless introduced a regression:
FAIL: gnat.dg/aliasing3.adb execution test
In Ada we don't mark (external) variables as addressable if w
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:26:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/21/14 21:59, Rich Felker wrote:
> >On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:17:53AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >>>Bug # 61144 is a regression in 4.9.0 that breaks building of musl libc
>
On 06/06/2014 12:54 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
If we want something like that as a standard type not supported on all
targets I'd think we should use the DTS 18661-3 naming (_Float128)
Ah, I wasn't aware of that TS, thanks. I'll check whether it's on the
C++ committee agenda yet.
Jason
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 06/06/2014 11:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > > What's your rationale for keeping this in a separate version block
> > > rather than in 1.3.9 (like __int128)?
> >
> > Powerpc already has those symbols in
On 06/06/2014 11:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
What's your rationale for keeping this in a separate version block
rather than in 1.3.9 (like __int128)?
Powerpc already has those symbols in CXXABI_LDBL_1.3 (for a type that
isn't __float128 but (de)mangles t
Hi all,
Our Fortran 2003 status page [1] says gfortran does not support "Kind type
parameters of integer specifiers”. This item is defined thusly (item 4.9 in
[2]):
> Some of the integer specifiers (e.g. NEXTREC) were limited to default kind in
> Fortran 95. Any kind of integer is permitted in
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 06/06/2014 10:16 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
* config/abi/pre/float128.ver: New file.
+CXXABI_FLOAT128_1.3.9 {
What's your rationale for keeping this in a separate version block rather
than in 1.3.9 (like __int128)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
On 06/06/14 15:40, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 6 June 2014 01:32, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Have these been tested for both big and little endian (especially for
tests where memory layout matters - load / store / lane number tests -
remembering that GNU C vector initializers always use array orderin
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Due to differences in how the ARM C Language Extensions and gcc's vector
> extensions deal with indices within vectors, the __builtin_shuffle masks
> used to implement the ZIP, UZP and TRN Neon Intrinsics in arm_neon.h are
> correct o
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> sorry for taking time to get back to it. I went through the code and see no
> obvious flaws
> except that I am somewhat concerned what happens with local aliases into the
> anchors.
> The problem however does not seem to be caused by it. I
On 06/06/14 16:40, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
here is a new try on adding __float128 typeinfo to libsupc++. The front-end
part is based on the discussion with Jason yesterday. The libstdc++ part
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> So when computing a range for z in
>>
>> z = y - x;
>>
>> with x = [-INF, y - 1] and y = [x + 1, +INF] (deduced from !(x >= y)) we
>> fail to do sth sensible with [y, y] - [-INF, y - 1] or [x + 1, +INF] - [x,
>> x] but we do sth with [x + 1
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
here is a new try on adding __float128 typeinfo to libsupc++. The front-end
part is based on the discussion with Jason yesterday. The libstdc++ part is
copied from:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml
On 6 June 2014 09:25, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This moves the 2nd VRP pass to run befoe phi_only_cprop as
> VRP performs jump-threading which can result in BBs with
> PHI singletons.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
>
> Richard.
>
Hi,
This caused PR 61430
https:/
On 06/06/2014 10:16 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
* config/abi/pre/float128.ver: New file.
+CXXABI_FLOAT128_1.3.9 {
What's your rationale for keeping this in a separate version block
rather than in 1.3.9 (like __int128)?
Jason
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> PR61415 shows a problem for two test cases that should only be tested if the
> target supports a 128-bit long double. In addition, the 128-bit long double
> pack and unpack builtins should not be enabled unless the target supports
> 128-bit l
OK.
Jason
The following adds the missing capability to sink loads to
tree-ssa-sink.c. This enables sinking of loads and dependent
expressions into code paths that uses them (thus performing
partial dead code elimination on loads).
The algorithm is simple (similar to that sinking stores) to
be light-weight
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Hello,
>
> here is a new try on adding __float128 typeinfo to libsupc++. The front-end
> part is based on the discussion with Jason yesterday. The libstdc++ part is
> copied from:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2014-04/msg00077.html
> (which
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 06/03/2014 10:55 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > OK.
>
> Thanks. Here's a new version of the original patch set. There are now three
> patches, the middle one containing just a few small cleanup steps towards
> unifying the code. There was confusion ab
There's a problem when offloading from a compiler for one target machine
to another: the machine specific options don't necessarily match. This
patch tries to address this.
The idea is that since we have two options sections anyway, with
different section name prefixes, we can arrange to pass
The attached crude patch as an -finit-local-vars option to the C front
end. If active, all local variables are initialized to zero. It is
part of an experiment to assess the performance impact of local variable
initialization.
This is not a real patch submission because the way the flag is
On 06/03/2014 10:55 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
OK.
Thanks. Here's a new version of the original patch set. There are now
three patches, the middle one containing just a few small cleanup steps
towards unifying the code. There was confusion about the meaning of the
"debug" variable, so I've c
On 6 June 2014 01:32, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> Have these been tested for both big and little endian (especially for
> tests where memory layout matters - load / store / lane number tests -
> remembering that GNU C vector initializers always use array ordering,
> which is not the same as the archi
Mostly markup tweaks, with some additional info to help debug
docbook/latex errors.
Committed to trunk.
commit c3b82a04203fce3e4ee05fd3e544e146ffa60f3a
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Thu May 29 14:24:10 2014 +0100
* doc/xml/faq.xml (faq.stream_reopening_fails): Replace in
code exam
I wondered if moving the list-collapsing code up for all cases would
work, so I gave it a try and it seems to work fine.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 7d4d6e5d91d5677be05ad196a140f28b01a8f55f
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Thu Jun 5 13:32:14 2014 -0400
PR c++/43453
On 06/06/14 12:40 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: 30_threads/pack
On 06/06/14 10:08 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
I'll look at rdbuf. Error in rdbuf? Do I need to do something?
No, just me being dumb. The ostream::operator<<(streambuf*) overload
behaves as an unformatted output function, so won't obey the padding,
which is exactly what you're trying to fix.
Hi,
On 06/06/2014 04:16 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
abi_check is broken before my patch (134 incompatible symbols).
Isn't broken for me, though. Likewise, AFAICS, on gcc-testresults. I
would recommend investigating in some detail what's going on at your end...
Paolo.
Hello,
here is a new try on adding __float128 typeinfo to libsupc++. The
front-end part is based on the discussion with Jason yesterday. The
libstdc++ part is copied from:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2014-04/msg00077.html
(which wasn't reviewed), but I changed the testsuite.
Michael will
On 06/05/2014 11:48 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 05/06/14 11:43 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 04/01/2014 07:33 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
[CCing gcc-patches]
On 11/03/14 11:18 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 02/14/2014 07:56 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
We need to implement this fix (pr
On 2014-06-04, 12:31 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
LRA generate caller-save register store/restore during split register,
not generate by caller-save.c:save_call_clobbered_regs, so initialize
this module by init_caller_save is meaningless if LRA enabled
2014-06-05 Kito Cheng
* ira.c (ira): Don't c
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>
>> I have committed a patch to libgo to merge from revision
>> 18783:00cce3a34d7e of the master library. This revision was committed
>> January 7. I picked this revision to merge to because the next revision
>> del
Hi Richard,
I've been working through the debug issues for O32 FPXX and O32 FP64 and have
identified some things to resolve along with proposed fixes...
What to do with debug info for double precision registers and the O32 FPXX
ABI? The choices are:
1) Do what O32 FP32 does and represent 8 byte v
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Matthew Fortune writes:
> > MIPSr6 only supports 64-bit registers which naturally leads to needing
> > -mfp64. MIPSr6 does however also support a single-precision only
> variant.
> >
> > For a single purpose native toolchain then --with-fp=64 can be used
> xor
> > --w
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 02:54:17AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the main purpose of this patch is to break up function
> > determine_known_aggregate_parts so that the next patch can use the
> > standalone bits and to make the changes slightly easier for review.
> >
> > However, this
Hi,
this rejects-valid issue, as submitted, has only the testcase:
union Test {
static constexpr int kConstant = 10;
};
which seems easy to handle by adjusting check_field_decls. While doing
that, I also noticed that the same piece of C++98 which went away in
C++11, thus allowing static mem
Hi all,
Here's a patch for PR 61422
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61422).
It fixes false positive on 16 byte access in ffmpeg standard library opus
file NLSF_del_dec_quant.c.
Reg. tested on x64.
--Marat
PR61422.diff
Description: Binary data
> So when computing a range for z in
>
> z = y - x;
>
> with x = [-INF, y - 1] and y = [x + 1, +INF] (deduced from !(x >= y)) we
> fail to do sth sensible with [y, y] - [-INF, y - 1] or [x + 1, +INF] - [x,
> x] but we do sth with [x + 1, +INF] - [-INF, x]? That seems odd to me.
>
> With the pa
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
> wrote:
> >
> > Great. What about you Andreas? Does it work fine for you? If yes, is this ok
> for trunk?
>
> Ok.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
Commited since I got positive feedback from C
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
>>
>> FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
>> WARNING: program timed out.
>> FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc exe
On 06/06/14 09:50, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The move_by_pieces infrastructure performs a copy by repeatedly trying
> the largest safe copy it can make. So for a 15-byte copy we might see:
>
> offset amount bytes copied
> 08 0-7
> 84 8-11
> 12 2
2014-06-04 11:15 GMT+04:00 Jeff Law :
> On 06/03/14 01:10, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch does not allow splitting in case bounds are returned until
>> retutrned bounds are supported. It also propagates instrumentation marks
>> for generated call and function.
>>
>> Bootstrapped a
Thanks. Committed.
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
Sent: 06 June 2014 10:40
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] default_add_stmt_cost should call target specific
builitin_vectorization_cost.
On Fri, Jun
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this issue a while back. My colleague Paulo Matos asked
> and it was agreed that this is a bug. But he forgot to submit a patch.
>
> default_add_stmt_cost should call target specific builtin_vectozriation_cost.
> instead of
2014-06-03 12:46 GMT+04:00 Richard Biener :
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds support for normal builtin function calls (target ones are
>> not instrumented). The basic idea of the patch is to make call expr copy
>> with no bounds and expand it
On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
Sorry about that, I don't know w
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> I have committed a patch to libgo to merge from revision
> 18783:00cce3a34d7e of the master library. This revision was committed
> January 7. I picked this revision to merge to because the next revision
> deleted a file that is explicitly merged in by the libgo/merge.
2014-06-04 10:58 GMT+04:00 Jeff Law :
> On 06/02/14 04:25, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds support for pointer bounds constants to be used as
>> DECL_INITIAL for constant bounds (like zero bounds).
>>
>> Bootstrapped and tested on linux-x86_64.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ilya
>> --
>> gc
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> an attached patch is an experiment on how much work it would take to move
> DECL_RESULT and DECL_ARGUMENTS, DECL_SAVED_TREE into struct function. The
> motivation is that middle-end threads them this way already - they are
> technically
Hi,
I came across this issue a while back. My colleague Paulo Matos asked
and it was agreed that this is a bug. But he forgot to submit a patch.
default_add_stmt_cost should call target specific builtin_vectozriation_cost.
instead of default_builtin_vectorization_cost directly. So if the hook
TAR
Hi,
The move_by_pieces infrastructure performs a copy by repeatedly trying
the largest safe copy it can make. So for a 15-byte copy we might see:
offset amount bytes copied
08 0-7
84 8-11
12 2 12-13
14 1 14
However, we can implement a 15-by
Hi,
an attached patch is an experiment on how much work it would take to move
DECL_RESULT and DECL_ARGUMENTS, DECL_SAVED_TREE into struct function. The
motivation is that middle-end threads them this way already - they are
technically part local declarations and part of the body. Moving those poin
Hello!
>> Failing to rethrow a __forced_unwind exception is very bad.
>>
>> This patch ensures we rethrow them in async tasks, and makes the
>> shared state ready with a broken_promise so that waiting threads
>> don't block forever. That seems reasonable to me, does anyone have any
>> better ideas
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> 2014-05-28 Richard Biener
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/61335
>> * tree-vrp.c (vrp_visit_phi_node): If the compare of old and
>> new range fails, drop to varying.
>>
>> * gfortran.dg/pr61335.f90: New testcase.
>
> This testcase triggers SIGFPE
2014-06-03 13:07 GMT+04:00 Richard Biener :
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds support for inlining instrumented calls. Changes are mostly
>> to support returned bounds. Also generated mem-to-mem assignments are
>> registered to be later instrum
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00573.html
>
> Thanks in advance.
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> --
> Eric Botcazou
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 7:32 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
> This patch include 2 cleanup that were requested in PR61320:
>
> * Use dg-additional-options to specify the extra option s390 target needs
> * Use the correct vocabulary of target endianness instead of host endianness
> in comments, pass
Hello!
> 2014-05-28 Richard Biener
>
> PR tree-optimization/61335
> * tree-vrp.c (vrp_visit_phi_node): If the compare of old and
> new range fails, drop to varying.
>
> * gfortran.dg/pr61335.f90: New testcase.
This testcase triggers SIGFPE on alpha due to the use of denormal
operand. Maybe uni
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
> > On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> >
> >> On 06/05/2014 03:50 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >> > Sandra Loosemore writes:
> >> > > On 06/05/2014 01:39 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [snip]
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00573.html
Thanks in advance.
--
Eric Botcazou
Similarly to what's done for gotos and conditional expressions.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline as obvious.
2014-06-06 Eric Botcazou
* tree-cfg.c (make_edges) : Put a location onto the edge.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: tree-cfg.c
===
Richard Biener writes:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>
>> On 06/05/2014 03:50 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> > Sandra Loosemore writes:
>> > > On 06/05/2014 01:39 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > [snip]
>> > > >
>> > > > Ok, we definitely need to preserve that (docum
This cleans up some left-overs of the transition from locators to locations in
the RTL middle-end, most notably direct comparisons against UNKNOWN_LOCATION,
and adds an insn_location function to be called instead of using insn_file and
insn_line in a row.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on
This moves the 2nd VRP pass to run befoe phi_only_cprop as
VRP performs jump-threading which can result in BBs with
PHI singletons.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2014-06-06 Richard Biener
* passes.def: Move 2nd VRP pass before phi-only-cprop.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 06/05/2014 03:50 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Sandra Loosemore writes:
> > > On 06/05/2014 01:39 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Ok, we definitely need to preserve that (documented) behavior. I
> > > > suppos
> Honza,
>
> How can we make further progress with the large regression on AIX?
David,
sorry for taking time to get back to it. I went through the code and see no
obvious flaws
except that I am somewhat concerned what happens with local aliases into the
anchors.
The problem however does not see
On 03 Jun 11:54, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This patch allows BUILT_IN_CHKP_BNDRET as a consumer of a result of
> > BUILT_IN_STACK_SAVE call.
> >
> > Bootstrapped and tested on linux-x86_64.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ilya
> > --
> > gcc/
On 03 Jun 17:27, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2014-06-03 15:56 GMT+04:00 Richard Biener :
> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> > wrote:
> >> 2014-06-03 13:45 GMT+04:00 Richard Biener :
> >>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Ilya Enkovich
> >>> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch
89 matches
Mail list logo