On 3/28/15 09:32, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 3/27/15 21:03, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 03/27/2015 01:05 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> For misalignment memory access, c6x gcc will cause issue, so need remove
>>> "clobber (match_scratch ...)" which will be symmetric with "movmisalign
>>> _load", then pass comp
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I forgot to say that for a { dg-do compile } test you don't need a
> 'test' variable and don't need to #include ,
Committed.
--
Regards,
Tim Shen
commit a1b32eec28442e38b830078ce3a9c142b1072647
Author: Tim Shen
Date: Fri Mar 27 20:3
The related warning:
g++ -c -DIN_GCC_FRONTEND -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE
-fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno-narrowing
-Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-format-attribute -Woverloaded-virtual
-pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros
On 3/27/15 21:03, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 03/27/2015 01:05 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> For misalignment memory access, c6x gcc will cause issue, so need remove
>> "clobber (match_scratch ...)" which will be symmetric with "movmisalign
>> _load", then pass compiling and generate correct assembly code.
At first glance this looked like only a regression in 4.9. While searching for
the regression I noticed an error in unit.c (probably a copy/paste error). Upon
correcting that obvious error, the regression found in 4.9 also appeared in 5.0.
The fix is simple and obvious and I have regression te
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 01:01:57AM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>
> AFAICT your test succeeds without your patch and does not test that the ICE
> reported by FX is gone (indeed it is with your patch).
>
Yeah, I thought about that, but did not pursue it, yet.
It is a zero-size string issue b
Steve,
AFAICT your test succeeds without your patch and does not test that the ICE
reported by FX is gone (indeed it is with your patch).
TIA
Dominique
Steve Kargl wrote:
The following patch avoids the dereferencing of
a null pointer, which led to an ICE. The patch
here is a slight variation on the patch submitted
by drikosev at otenet dot gr. The testcase is a
slight variation on the code submitted by FX.
Built and regression tested on x86_6
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> In this testcase we were crashing while trying to gimplify a switch, because
> the types of the switch condition and case constants didn't match. This ICE
> started with my -Wswitch-with-enum-bit-fields fix where I used the unlowered
> type
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> In this testcase we were crashing while trying to gimplify a switch, because
> the types of the switch condition and case constants didn't match. This ICE
> started with my -Wswitch-with-enum-bit-fields fix where I used the unlowered
> type
The following patch avoids the dereferencing of
a null pointer, which led to an ICE. The patch
here is a slight variation on the patch submitted
by drikosev at otenet dot gr. The testcase is a
slight variation on the code submitted by FX.
Built and regression tested on x86_64-*-freebsd.
OK to c
On 03/27/2015 02:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Yeah, and refactoring copy_bbs so that the actual edge duplication happens
in another function (thus we can have two of them).
Exactly.
I was also playing with the idea to support value-numbering the stmts
on-the-fly as we copy them and use this
The following patch was ported to gcc-4.9 branch from the mainline.
The patch was bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 221743.
2015-03-27 Vladimir Makarov
Backport from mainline
2015-01-30 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/64688
* lra-constraints.c
In gcc-5/changes.html the section about __has_include and __has_include_next
says:
The header search paths for __has_include_next and __has_include_next are
equivalent to those of the standard directive #include and the extension
#include_next respectively.
I think the first __has_include_next
On 24/03/15 19:53, Yvan Roux wrote:
Hi,
after the issue with duplicated alternatives exhibited by PR64208, I
checked the arm.md file and found that *arm_subsi3_insn has a
duplication where alt 4 is (r,rI,r) and alt 6 is (r,r,r), this results
in emitting an rsb instruction instead of a sub one,
On Mar 27, 2015, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu native and on i686-pc-linux-gnu native
> on x86_64, so without lto. Is this ok to install?
Err, sorry, wrong keystroke, I didn't mean to post that message yet, I
was just drafting it while several of the issues were still
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/06/2015 05:42 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> gcc/
>>
>> PR target/65248
>> * output.h (default_binds_local_p_2): New.
>> * varasm.c (default_binds_local_p_2): Renamed to ...
>> (default_binds_local_p_3): This. Don't
This patch reworks the out-of-ssa expander to enable coalescing of SSA
partitions that don't share the same base name. This is done only when
optimizing.
The test we use to tell whether two partitions can be merged no longer
demands them to have the same base variable when optimizing, so they
bec
On 03/06/2015 05:42 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> gcc/
>
> PR target/65248
> * output.h (default_binds_local_p_2): New.
> * varasm.c (default_binds_local_p_2): Renamed to ...
> (default_binds_local_p_3): This. Don't return true on protected
> data symbol if protected data may
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>>> Unfortunately, while "normal" bootstrap works OK with alpha-linux-gnu
>>> and alphaev68-linux-gnu, the bootstrap still fails when configured
>>> --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto:
>
> [..
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> For %rip addressing, we only can use disp32 and thus can add
> constants to the symbol/label, but not a register etc., as
> there is no instruction supporting (plus (symbol_ref) (reg))
> for PIC.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux an
Hi!
For %rip addressing, we only can use disp32 and thus can add
constants to the symbol/label, but not a register etc., as
there is no instruction supporting (plus (symbol_ref) (reg))
for PIC.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-03-27 Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:52 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>>> On Mar 18, 2015, at 2:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Here is the updated patch with testcases. Tested on Linux/x86. OK
> for
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 2015, at 2:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
Here is the updated patch with testcases. Tested on Linux/x86. OK
for trunk?
>>
>>> This patch needs global reviewer approval
It took me a while to get a test case I'm happy with, so I'm
re-submitting the whole patch for approval.
2015-03-27 Caroline Tice
* final.c (final_scan_insn): Change 'cold_function_name' to
'cold_partition_name' and make it a global variable; also output
assembly to gi
OK.
Jason
Hi,
there is now pending GDB patch for: (gdb) compile print EXPR
[PATCH 4/4] compile: New 'compile print'
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-03/msg00875.html
Reasons for this patch:
How to implement '@' GDB-like operator for libcc1
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gc
This was breaking because ancient code in the front end to avoid
emitting unreferenced static const variables was preventing the
vdefinition flag from being set on the varpool node for the variables.
Now that we have cgraph controlling what gets emitted, there is no point
in keeping this code a
Hi,
this patch fixes ICE with register variable when WHOPR decides to partition
it. I did not include testcase because it depends on partitining and thus
it is huge. It may be possible to produce smaller one with
-flto-partition=max
Bootstrap/regtest x86_64-linux is running, will commit it once i
Hi,
I notieced that GGC hash tables are now accounted to hash-table.h:alloc_entries
that is not very informative (we do not have any stats for heap hash tables that
would be nice to have).
This patch fixes the first problem by adding annotations. OK (perhaps for next
stage1?)
Bootstrapped/regtest
Hi,
this patch fixes bug in symtab_node::verify_symtab_nodes pointed out by Ilya.
The loop checking that there all comdats are linked by same_comdat_group was
completely bogus. In addition it checked also external symbols that are
currently not kept in groups. This bug was in mainline for months
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:09:19 +0100
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:44:39PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > If it is too late for such global changes (rework initialization in
> > libgomp, change mic and ptx plugins), then here is a small
> > workaround patch to fix offloading from
Hi,
this patch fixes ice in resolve_speculatoin expecting that there is callgraph
node for declaration it is passed. I also revisited earlier fix to
cgraph_update_edges_for_call_stmt_node: the function would still ICE if
dead indirect call was updated. I do not think it happens as only user
is fo
The following patch fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65407
The patch was bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64, ppc64, aarch64.
Committed as rev. 221734.
2015-03-27 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/65407
* ira-costs.c (record_reg_classes): Process all constraint
In this testcase we were crashing while trying to gimplify a switch, because
the types of the switch condition and case constants didn't match. This ICE
started with my -Wswitch-with-enum-bit-fields fix where I used the unlowered
type so that we're able to get hold of the enum type. The problem w
Hi,
I would like to resubmit these patches for comments. The previous detailed
discussion is available in the below mentioned link.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01679.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00489.html
The issue is still reproducible on GCC v4.8 branch
Hi,
this patch fixes PR65443, a todo in the parloops pass for function
transform_to_exit_first_loop:
...
TODO: the common case is that latch of the loop is empty and immediately
follows the loop exit. In this case, it would be better not to copy the
body of the loop, but only move the
> please find attached a fix for the recently introduced regression when
> allocating arrays with an intrinsic function for source=. ...
I confirm that the patch fixes pr65548 without regression.
Thanks,
Dominique
This is a problem where we reject labels on a jump instruction because
they are invalid with pic for the 's' constraint. It seems that the
constraint wasn't checked in earlier versions of the compiler.
Fixed by adding a new constraint and using that instead.
Bernd
commit 432e3b7c5e3e47fdc9232
On 03/27/2015 01:05 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
For misalignment memory access, c6x gcc will cause issue, so need remove
"clobber (match_scratch ...)" which will be symmetric with "movmisalign
_load", then pass compiling and generate correct assembly code.
* config/c6x/c6x.md (movmisalign_st
Dear Andre,
I am in the UK as of last night. Before leaving, I bootstrapped and
regtested your patch and all was well. I must drive to Cambridge this
afternoon to see my mother and will try to get to it either this
evening or tomorrow morning. There is so much of it and it touches
many places; so
This is a tiny tweak to add a missing piece of C++14 support, the
duration literals should be usable via "using namespace std::chrono".
It doesn't affect anything in C++03 or C++11 mode so safe for trunk
now.
Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 907f5e128d855d339829abbd1d314f382e3ae6f
On 15/03/15 23:27 -0700, Tim Shen wrote:
+#include
+#include
+
+// libstdc++/65420
+void
+test01()
+{
+ bool test __attribute__((unused)) = true;
I forgot to say that for a { dg-do compile } test you don't need a
'test' variable and don't need to #include ,
Hi all,
commited as r221729 to meet the legal requirements and fix some typos.
Regards,
Andre
--
Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
===
--- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (Revision 221728
Hi,
this patch adds verification to libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-6.c.
Committed as approved by Jakub here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65594#c8 .
Thanks,
- Tom
Add verification to libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-6.c
2015-03-27 Tom de Vries
* testsuite/libgomp.graphit
Hi,
I regularly run into a timeout of libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-6.c (filed as
PR65594).
This patch scales down libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-6.c, which fixes the
timeout.
Committed as approved by Jakub here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65594#c8 .
Thanks,
- Tom
Sca
Original post https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg02096.html
Tested check-gcc on aarch64-none-linux-gnu (native), fixes all variants of
gcc.dg/pch/largefile.c (below).
Ok?
Cheers, Alan
gcc/ChangeLog:
Backport r207785 from mainline
2014-01-31 Kyle McMartin
Hi,
this patch fixes ICE in is_a test when cgraph_update_edges_for_call_stmt_node
tries to convert non-call stmt to call. I have bootstrapped/regtested
x86_64-linux and tested firefox/chromium LTO build, so hope it is the last
issue surfacing from the today verifier change.
PR middle-end/
2015-03-27 13:13 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Ilya Enkovich
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch avoids various ICEs due to -fcheck-pointer-bounds used for not
>> supported languages. All options get the same languages list. Bootstrapped
>> and tested on x86_64-u
From: Trevor Saunders
Hi,
Unfortunately when testing r217869 I didn't realize the modified code in
alpha.c was only used for some alpha targets. So testing alpha-linux wasn't
enough or even really useful :(
I tested cc1 for alpha-dec-vms now builds as discussed before make all-gcc is
still bro
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch avoids various ICEs due to -fcheck-pointer-bounds used for not
> supported languages. All options get the same languages list. Bootstrapped
> and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Does it look OK?
Ok, but do we rea
Hi Xingxing,
do you know if it is possible to test this patch inside Marvell (as it
is a fix for iWMMXT arch.) ?
Thanks a lot
Yvan
On 23 March 2015 at 18:47, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23 March 2015 at 17:08, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Yvan Roux wrot
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:58:14AM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> For -fopenmp-simd, GCC did not properly jump passed the clauses of
> ignored directives. It worked, for "for simd" directives and for
> those without clauses.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
> OK for the trunk?
>
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01014.html
Thanks,
Kyrill
On 19/03/15 14:39, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This patch fixes PR 65358. For details look at the excellent write-up
by Honggyu in bugzilla. The problem is that we're trying to pass a struct
partially on the stack a
For -fopenmp-simd, GCC did not properly jump passed the clauses of
ignored directives. It worked, for "for simd" directives and for
those without clauses.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk?
Tobias
2015-03-28 Tobias Burnus
PR c/65586
gcc/c/
* c-parser.c (c_pars
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:55:48AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Ok?
Sure, it is obvious.
> 2015-03-27 Marek Polacek
>
> * gimple-iterator.h (gsi_prev_nondebug): Fix typo.
>
> diff --git gcc/gimple-iterator.h gcc/gimple-iterator.h
> index 6be88dd..9aa7508 100644
> --- gcc/gimple-iterat
Ok?
2015-03-27 Marek Polacek
* gimple-iterator.h (gsi_prev_nondebug): Fix typo.
diff --git gcc/gimple-iterator.h gcc/gimple-iterator.h
index 6be88dd..9aa7508 100644
--- gcc/gimple-iterator.h
+++ gcc/gimple-iterator.h
@@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ gsi_next_nondebug (gimple_stmt_iterator *i)
w
Hi,
This patch avoids various ICEs due to -fcheck-pointer-bounds used for not
supported languages. All options get the same languages list. Bootstrapped
and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Does it look OK?
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2015-03-27 Ilya Enkovich
PR target/65495
* c-f
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:30:38AM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> At a second glance it is not really clear to me why we disable hotpatching
> for nested functions at
> all. While it is probably a bit difficult to actually hotpatch them I don't
> see why we should
> prevent it. We probably just
On 27 March 2015 at 03:14, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On 2015.03.27 at 00:46 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> > > On 26 March 2015 at 22:12, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> > > After this fix, I can see build failures in glibc:
>> > > key_call.c:574:1: internal compiler error: in inline_call, at
>> > > ipa-inline-t
On 03/26/2015 09:56 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 01:19:38PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>> @@ -11368,6 +11349,7 @@ static void
>> s390_reorg (void)
>> {
>>bool pool_overflow = false;
>> + int hw_before, hw_after;
>>
>>/* Make sure all splits have been perf
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/25/2015 05:09 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>>>
>>> Specifically, it seems to me that copy_bbs should be refactored into
>>> copy_bbs and copy_bbs_for_threading or somesuch. Where those
>>> routines call into refactored common subroutines, but o
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:50:09AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> 2015-03-26 Marek Polacek
>
> PR sanitizer/65583
> * ubsan.c (ubsan_create_edge): New function.
> (instrument_bool_enum_load): Call it.
> (instrument_nonnull_arg): Likewise.
> (instrument_nonnull_retur
63 matches
Mail list logo
