Re: [Patch, avr] Fix PR 67839 - bit addressable instructions generated for out of range addresses

Ping! Regards Senthil On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 03:17:17PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > Ping! > > Regards > Senthil > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:30:58PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As part of support for io and io_low attributes, the upper bound of > > the

Re: [Patch, committed] PR67933

Oh bother! Thanks, Dominique Paul On 27 October 2015 at 19:24, Dominique d'Humières wrote: > Dear Paul, > >> I have added a testcase, which has been committed as revision 229452. > > If I compile the test with -fsanitize=address,undefined I get at run time > > ==72440==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: g

Re: [OpenACC 7/11] execution model

On 10/27/15 07:02, Nathan Sidwell wrote: yeah, I noticed diff got confused. (I'm not sure the above suggestion will resolve it, but we can give it a go. This is what I've committed. This breaks the libgomp reduction tests on nvidia, because there's now a discrepancy between loop iteration

[PATCH GCC]Fix memory leak and wrong invariant dependence computation in IVOPT

Hi, When address iv uses grouping was introduced, I also introduced memory leak and wrong computation of depends_on bitmap. The intention is to skip `depends_on' computation for sub address type iv uses. Unfortunately, the code is wrong because depends_on is freed in subsequent calls to get_compu

Re: [PATCH 7/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: middle-end, LTO FE

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:06:42PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/26/2015 12:45 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > Don't change the whitespace here. Looks like you probably removed a > page > break. > >>>Not obvious where it got lost as there's no filename in the review > >>>comments :-) > >> > >>Oo

Re: [OpenACC 8/11] device-specific lowering

On 10/26/15 08:13, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:49:08PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: This patch is the device-specific half of the previous patch. It processes the partition head & tail markers and loop abstraction functions inserted during omp lowering. This is the patch

Re: Fix PR 67609

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 4:45 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: >> The problem in this PR is that a word-mode subreg is used to write to a >> multi-word pseudo, under the assumption that is the correct way to insert a >> value into the appropriate bits

Re: Fix PR 67609

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > The problem in this PR is that a word-mode subreg is used to write to a > multi-word pseudo, under the assumption that is the correct way to insert a > value into the appropriate bits of the pseudo. > > Except that the pseudo then gets as

Re: Drop types_compatible_p from operand_equal_p

> > Yep, I am aware that tree hasing must match. I think my changes are safe so > > far: > > - ctors are already hashed resonably > > - types are not hashed so the changes strenghtening OEP_ADDRESS_OF are safe > > - OEP_ADDRESS_OF (so far) still boils down to syntactic matching. > > > > Looki

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #8 (libgcc bits)

This patch does not take account of the issues with the powerpc-specific functions that I pointed out in when they were posted to libc-alpha. (Testcases covering those issues would be a good idea to put in the testsuite.) The patch

[AArch64] Add scheduling and cost models for Exynos M1

This patch adds the scheduling and cost models for Exynos M1. Though it’s a rather large patch, much of it is the DFA model for the pipeline.  Still, I’d appreciate any feedback. Please, commit if it’s alright. Thank you, -- Evandro Menezes 0001-AArch64-Add-scheduling-and-cost-models-for-Ex

Re: [PATCH 04/10] Reimplement diagnostic_show_locus, introducing rich_location classes (v5)

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: The change since v4 can be seen at: https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2015-10-23/0001-Add-colorize_source_p-to-diagnostic_context.patch which is a tweak to colorization, to handle both frontends that provide ranges and those that only provide ca

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #9 (enable __float128 by default on VSX systems)

This is the final patch that enables __float128 by default on systems that support the VSX instruction set (power7, power8). In addition, I added two runtime tests to verify that __float128 runs, and gives more precision than double. Once all of the sub-patches for patch #7 for gcc and patch #8 f

Re: [PATCH] Optional escaped commas in macros

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Andres Tiraboschi wrote: > While we start a discussion with the C committee regarding the standarization > of this feature, we think that this is a useful nonstandard addition to be > early adopted. Are you raising the issue with WG14 in Kona this week? I'd be wary of this

Re: [PATCH] tree-scalar-evolution.c: Handle LSHIFT by constant

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Alan Lawrence wrote: > --in-reply-to > > > On 26/10/15 08:58, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote: >>> + chrec2 = fold_build2 (LSHIFT_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (rhs1), >>> + build_int_cst (TREE_TY

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #8 (libgcc bits)

Assuming the 17 sub-patches within patch #7 are approved, this patch adds the necessary bits to libgcc to build the __float128 emulation functions. Originally, it was thought that since it uses the TFmode emulation functions from the libgcc/soft-fp directory, that we would need to submit the patch

Re: [OpenACC 6/11] Reduction initialization

On 10/22/15 01:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:24:13PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: 2015-10-20 Nathan Sidwell * omp-low.c (oacc_init_rediction_array): New. (oacc_initialize_reduction_data): Initialize array. Ok. Committed.

Re: [OpenACC 3/11] new target hook

On 10/22/15 01:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:13:26PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: 2015-10-20 Nathan Sidwell * target.def (fork_join): New GOACC hook. * targhooks.h (default_goacc_fork_join): Declare. * omp-low.c (default_goacc_forkjoin): New.

Re: [PATCH 09/10] Delay some resolution of ad-hoc locations, preserving ranges

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: Some diagnostics e.g. -Wmaybe-uninitialized weren't showing underlines, despite being provided with range-based data. Debugging showed that it the pertinent location was an ad-hoc location with a range: (gdb) p /x loc $9 = 0x802a (gdb)

Re: [PATCH 07/10] Add plugin to recursively dump the source-ranges in a tree (v2)

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: This patch adds a test plugin that recurses down an expression tree, printing diagnostics showing the ranges of each node in the tree. It corresponds to: [PATCH 15/22] Add plugin to recursively dump the source-ranges in a tree https://gcc.gnu.

Re: [PATCH 05/10] Add ranges to libcpp tokens (via ad-hoc data, unoptimized)

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: This patch: - generalizes the meaning of the source_location (aka location_t) type from being a caret within the source code to being a caret plus a source_range. The latter data is stored purely in the ad-hoc data lookaside for now

Re: [c++-delayed-folding] Introduce convert_to_pointer_nofold

On 10/27/2015 01:50 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 04:49:08AM -1000, Jason Merrill wrote: On 10/19/2015 05:33 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: + if (fold_p) + expr = fold_build1_loc (loc, NOP_EXPR, totype, expr); + else + expr = build1_loc (

Re: [PATCH] Add contains_symbol_ref_p .

On 10/26/2015 04:47 PM, Anatoliy Sokolov wrote: Hello. This patch add contains_symbol_ref_p function in rtlanal.c and remove contains_symbol_ref_p from lra-constraints.c and contains_symbol_ref from var-tracking.c. Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? 2015

Re: [gomp4.1] Handle new form of #pragma omp declare target

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 15:05:59 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > As the testcases show, #pragma omp declare target has now a new form (well, > two; with some issues on it pending), where it is used just as a single > declarative directive rather than a pair of them and allows marking > vars and funct

Re: [MCORE] Hookize GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS

On 10/26/2015 04:44 PM, Anatoliy Sokolov wrote: Hi. This patch removes obsolete GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS macros from the MCORE back end in the GCC and introduce equivalent TARGET_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS_P target hook. Regression tested on mcore-unknown-elf. Only compile test run. OK for trunk? 201

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/27/2015 09:42 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call *mem" in aarch64 and some other targets. It is a fairly x86_64

Re: [vec-cmp, patch 1/6] Add optabs for vector comparison

On 10/22/2015 10:12 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: 2015-10-22 18:52 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law : On 10/22/2015 04:35 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: 2015-10-21 20:25 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law : On 10/08/2015 08:52 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: Hi, This series introduces autogeneration of vector comparison and its suppor

Re: [PATCH] Optional escaped commas in macros

2015-10-27 16:35 GMT-03:00 Andres Tiraboschi : > This patch is for gcc-5.2.0 adds the XXX option to the preprocessor Sorry I forgot to clarify that fmacro-escaped-commas is the option name. Thanks, Andrés.

Re: [OpenACC 9/11] oacc_device_lower pass gate

On 10/22/15 02:32, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:50:31PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: This patch is obvious, but included for completeness. We always want to run the device lowering pass (when openacc is enabled), in order to delete the marker and loop functions that should ne

Fix PR 67609

The problem in this PR is that a word-mode subreg is used to write to a multi-word pseudo, under the assumption that is the correct way to insert a value into the appropriate bits of the pseudo. Except that the pseudo then gets assigned to an SSE register, at which point all of the assumptions sta

Re: [OpenACC 4/11] C FE changes

On 10/26/15 15:27, Cesar Philippidis wrote: On 10/26/2015 01:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Ok for trunk with those changes fixed. Here's the patch with those changes. Nathan will commit this patch the rest of the openacc execution model patches. This is the patch I've committed. nathan 2015-

Re: [OpenACC 5/11] C++ FE changes

On 10/27/15 00:59, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 03:35:20PM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: I used that generic message for all of those clauses except for _GANG, _WORKER and _VECTOR. The gang clause, at the very least, needed it to disambiguate the static and num arguments. If yo

[OpenACC] declare directive

Hi! This patch adds the processing of OpenACC declare directive in C and C++. (Note: Support in Fortran is already in trunk.) Commentary on the changes is included as an attachment (NOTES). All of the code is in the gomp-4_0-branch. Regtested on x86_64-linux. Thanks!

Re: [OpenACC 1/11] UNIQUE internal function

This is the patch that was committed. nathan 2015-10-27 Nathan Sidwell * internal-fn.c (expand_UNIQUE): New. * internal-fn.h (enum ifn_unique_kind): New. * internal-fn.def (IFN_UNIQUE): New. * target-insns.def (unique): Define. * gimple.h (gimple_call_internal_unique_p): New. * gimple.

[PATCH 08/16] Add test-ggc.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-ggc.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-ggc.c | 299 + 1 file changed, 299 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-ggc.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-ggc.c b/gcc/te

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 15:48 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: [...snip...] Looks like [Patch 02/16] was too big (1.2MB) for the list; it can be seen here: https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2015-10-27/unittests/0002-Add-embedded-copy-of-gtest-1.7-to-unittests.patch [..snip...]

[PATCH 09/16] Add test-gimple.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-gimple.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-gimple.c | 178 ++ 1 file changed, 178 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-gimple.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-gimple.c

[PATCH 16/16] Add test-wide-int.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-wide-int.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-wide-int.c | 185 1 file changed, 185 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-wide-int.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-wide-

[PATCH 13/16] Add test-rtl.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-rtl.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-rtl.c | 94 ++ 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-rtl.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-rtl.c b/gcc/tes

[PATCH 12/16] Add test-locations.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-locations.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-locations.c | 145 +++ 1 file changed, 145 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-locations.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-loc

[PATCH 14/16] Add test-tree.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-tree.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-tree.c | 101 1 file changed, 101 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-tree.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-tree.c b/gcc

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #7 (revised #2), Subpatch #17

This patch adds a test to make sure __float128 and __ibm128 are not allowed to be combined in binary operations. I re-ran the test suite on power8 little endian, and this test passed. Once the preceeding 16 patches are applied to the tree, is this patch ok to commit into trunk? 2015-10-27 Michae

[PATCH] Optional escaped commas in macros

This patch is for gcc-5.2.0 adds the XXX option to the preprocessor that enables to escape commas when passing macro arguments. This feature is useful in C++ when the macro argument is a template with more than one argument, and adding extra ( ) is not possible, as shown in this example: templ

[PATCH 06/16] Add test-folding.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-folding.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-folding.c | 120 + 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-folding.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-folding

[PATCH 04/16] Add test-cfg.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-cfg.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-cfg.c | 319 + 1 file changed, 319 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-cfg.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-cfg.c b/gcc/te

[PATCH 10/16] Add test-hash-map.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-hash-map.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-map.c | 77 + 1 file changed, 77 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-map.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-m

[PATCH 15/16] Add test-vec.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-vec.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-vec.c | 161 + 1 file changed, 161 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-vec.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-vec.c b/gcc/te

[PATCH 07/16] Add test-functions.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-functions.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-functions.c | 645 +++ 1 file changed, 645 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-functions.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-fun

[PATCH 11/16] Add test-hash-set.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-hash-set.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-set.c | 53 + 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-set.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-hash-s

[PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

This is a followup to these proposals: * v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00765.html * v2: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01224.html The following patch kit adds a unit tests framework for gcc, as a new subdirectory below gcc/testsuite. The aim is to give us dire

[PATCH 01/16] Add unittest infrastructure

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/plugin/plugin.exp (plugin_test_list): Add the unittests plugin. * g++.dg/plugin/unittests.C: New file. * gcc.dg/plugin/plugin.exp (plugin_test_list): Add the unittests plugin. * gcc.dg/plugin/unittests.c: New file.

[PATCH 05/16] Add test-et-forest.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-et-forest.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-et-forest.c | 121 +++ 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-et-forest.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-et-

[PATCH 03/16] Add test-bitmap.c to unittests

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-bitmap.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-bitmap.c | 116 ++ 1 file changed, 116 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-bitmap.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-bitmap.c

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/27/2015 09:42 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> >> >> >> On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan >>> wrote: > > OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, b

[gomp4] fortran cleanups and c/c++ loop parsing backport

This patch contains the following: * C front end changes from trunk: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02528.html * C++ front end changes from trunk: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02540.html * Proposed fortran cleanups and enhanced error reporting change

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] PR 68102: Check that operand is REG before checking the REGNO in mov-immediate splitters

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:06:12PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi all, > > This is another RTL checking error occuring in the splitting condition of the > mov-immediate patterns. We take a REGNO of operands[0] which is a > nonimmediate_operand. Since the immediate splitting code only makes se

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Handle vector float modes properly in aarch64_output_simd_mov_immediate

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:21:44PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi all, > > The testcase gcc.target/aarch64/vldN_lane_1.c ICEs on aarch64 targets when > RTL checking is enabled. We end up taking the UINTVAL of a CONST_DOUBLE in > aarch64_output_simd_mov_immediate. This is because > aarch64_out

Re: [Patch, committed] PR67933

Dear Paul, > I have added a testcase, which has been committed as revision 229452. If I compile the test with -fsanitize=address,undefined I get at run time ==72440==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: global-buffer-overflow on address 0x00010adfee20 at pc 0x00010adf913d bp 0x7fff54e0a270 sp 0x7fff54e0a26

[PATCH][AArch64] Handle vector float modes properly in aarch64_output_simd_mov_immediate

Hi all, The testcase gcc.target/aarch64/vldN_lane_1.c ICEs on aarch64 targets when RTL checking is enabled. We end up taking the UINTVAL of a CONST_DOUBLE in aarch64_output_simd_mov_immediate. This is because aarch64_output_simd_mov_immediate only handles SF and DF inner modes whereas in that

[Patch, committed] PR67933

Dear All, The recent patches on trunk to gfc_trans_allocate have fixed PR67933. I have added a testcase, which has been committed as revision 229452. Since this is a 4.9/5 regression, I will extract the minimum change necessary and will submit it as soon as I have regtested. Cheers Paul 2015-0

[PATCH][AArch64] PR 68102: Check that operand is REG before checking the REGNO in mov-immediate splitters

Hi all, This is another RTL checking error occuring in the splitting condition of the mov-immediate patterns. We take a REGNO of operands[0] which is a nonimmediate_operand. Since the immediate splitting code only makes sense when the destination is a register, we should be guarding that condit

Re: [PATCH] Add -fchecking

On 10/27/2015 09:32 AM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: On 10/27/2015 04:17 PM, Richard Biener wrote: This adds -fchecking as a way to enable internal consistency checks even in release builds (or disable checking with -fno-checking - up to a certain extent - with checking enabled). I remember that Ja

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/27/2015 09:26 AM, Jiong Wang wrote: On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call *mem" in aarch64 and some other targets. It is a fairly x86_64 specific optim

Re: [c++-delayed-folding] Introduce convert_to_pointer_nofold

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 04:49:08AM -1000, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 10/19/2015 05:33 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >+if (fold_p) > >+ expr = fold_build1_loc (loc, NOP_EXPR, totype, expr); > >+else > >+ expr = build1_loc (loc, NOP_EXPR, totype, expr); > > Rather than

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/27/2015 09:42 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call *mem" in aarch64 and some other targets. It is a fairly x86_64

Re: [PATCH] PR/67682, break SLP groups up if only some elements match

On 26/10/15 15:04, Richard Biener wrote: apart from the fact that you'll post a new version you need to adjust GROUP_GAP. You also seem to somewhat "confuse" "first I stmts" and "a group of size I", those are not the same when the group has haps. I'd say "a group of size i" makes the most sense

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR66313

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > When factoring a*b + a*c to (b + c)*a we have to guard against the > case of a == 0 as after the factoring b + c might overflow in that > case. Fixed by doing the addition in an unsigned type if required. The same applies to a == -1 (consider b and c

Re: [PING][PATCHv2, ARM, libgcc] New aeabi_idiv function for armv6-m

Ping. BR, Andre On 13/10/15 18:01, Andre Vieira wrote: This patch ports the aeabi_idiv routine from Linaro Cortex-Strings (https://git.linaro.org/toolchain/cortex-strings.git), which was contributed by ARM under Free BSD license. The new aeabi_idiv routine is used to replace the one in libgcc/

Re: [PR fortran/63865] OpenACC cache directive: match Fortran support with C/C++

Hi! On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 16:26:54 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:19:49PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:44:58 +0100, I wrote: > > > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:36:46 +0100, I wrote: > > > > In r217146, I applied the following to gomp-4_0-branch: > > >

[PATCH, committed] PR fortran/68108 -- Check for valid array ref.

I've committed the attached patch after testing on x86_64-*-freebsd. A regression was introduced by my fix for PR fortran/67805, which failed to check for a valid array ref. Note, Mikael approved the patch in the PR audit trail. 2015-10-27 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/68108 *

Re: Move some comparison simplifications to match.pd

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: So here the types are shorts and unsigned shorts. On aarch64 these are HImode values and there's no direct arithmetic operations on them, so they have to be extended to SImode and truncated back. Ah ok, that makes sense. I expect it is in the case wh

Re: [AArch64][PATCH 2/7] Add sqrdmah, sqrdmsh instructions.

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:11:07PM +, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 27/10/15 11:18, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > >> ;; --- > >>@@ -932,6 +934,8 @@ > >> UNSPEC_SQSHRN UNSPEC_UQSHRN > >>

Re: [AArch64][PATCH 2/7] Add sqrdmah, sqrdmsh instructions.

On 27/10/15 11:18, James Greenhalgh wrote: ;; --- @@ -932,6 +934,8 @@ UNSPEC_SQSHRN UNSPEC_UQSHRN UNSPEC_SQRSHRN UNSPEC_UQRSHRN]) +(define_int_iterator SQRDMLAH [U

Re: Move some comparison simplifications to match.pd

On 27/10/15 15:57, Marc Glisse wrote: On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Marc, On 30/08/15 08:57, Marc Glisse wrote: Hello, just trying to shrink fold-const.c a bit more. initializer_zerop is close to what I was looking for with zerop, but I wasn't sure if it would be safe (it a

Re: Move some comparison simplifications to match.pd

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Marc, On 30/08/15 08:57, Marc Glisse wrote: Hello, just trying to shrink fold-const.c a bit more. initializer_zerop is close to what I was looking for with zerop, but I wasn't sure if it would be safe (it accepts some CONSTRUCTOR and STRING_CST).

Re: Re: [Bulk] [OpenACC 0/7] host_data construct

On 10/26/2015 11:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:51:42AM -0500, James Norris wrote: >> @@ -12942,6 +12961,7 @@ c_finish_omp_clauses (tree clauses, bool is_omp, >> bool declare_simd) >> case OMP_CLAUSE_GANG: >> case OMP_CLAUSE_WORKER: >> case OMP_CLAUSE_VECTO

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: >> >>> >>> OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do >>> "call *mem" in >>> aarch64 and some other targets. >> >> It is a fairly x86_64 specific optimization and doesn

Re: [PATCH] Add -fchecking

On 10/27/2015 04:17 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > This adds -fchecking as a way to enable internal consistency checks > even in release builds (or disable checking with -fno-checking - up to > a certain extent - with checking enabled). I remember that Jakub proposed to use __builtin_expect with f

Re: more accurate error messages omp in fortran

(was "Re: more accurate omp in fortran" Ping. Cesar On 10/22/2015 08:21 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > Currently, for certain omp and oacc errors the fortran will inaccurately > report exactly where in the omp/acc construct the error has occurred. E.g. > >!$acc parallel copy (i) copy (i) co

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Jiong Wang wrote: > > > On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan >> wrote: OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call *mem" in aarch64 and some other targets

Re: Move some comparison simplifications to match.pd

Hi Marc, On 30/08/15 08:57, Marc Glisse wrote: Hello, just trying to shrink fold-const.c a bit more. initializer_zerop is close to what I was looking for with zerop, but I wasn't sure if it would be safe (it accepts some CONSTRUCTOR and STRING_CST). At some point I tried using sign_bit_p, but

Re: [AArch64][dejagnu][PATCH 5/7] Dejagnu support for ARMv8.1 Adv.SIMD.

On 24/10/15 08:16, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: On October 23, 2015 2:24:26 PM GMT+02:00, Matthew Wahab wrote: The ARMv8.1 architecture extension adds two Adv.SIMD instructions,. This patch adds support in Dejagnu for ARMv8.1 Adv.SIMD specifiers and checks. The new test options are - { dg-

Re: [PATCH] Pass manager: add support for termination of pass list

On 10/27/2015 03:49 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 10/26/2015 02:48 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Martin Liška wrote: On 10/21/2015 04:06 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:24 PM,

Re: [PR fortran/63865] OpenACC cache directive: match Fortran support with C/C++ (was: [gomp4] OpenACC cache directive maintenance)

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:19:49PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:44:58 +0100, I wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:36:46 +0100, I wrote: > > > In r217146, I applied the following to gomp-4_0-branch: > > > > > > [OpenACC cache directive maintenance in C/C++] > > > I also tr

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 27/10/15 14:50, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call *mem" in aarch64 and some other targets. It is a fairly x86_64 specific optimization and doesn't apply to AArch64. The

[PR fortran/63865] OpenACC cache directive: match Fortran support with C/C++ (was: [gomp4] OpenACC cache directive maintenance)

Hi! On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:44:58 +0100, I wrote: > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 17:36:46 +0100, I wrote: > > In r217146, I applied the following to gomp-4_0-branch: > > > > [OpenACC cache directive maintenance in C/C++] > I also tried to make this work for Fortran, but didn't manage to (in > a reasonable

Re: [PATCH] Pass manager: add support for termination of pass list

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 10/26/2015 02:48 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> On 10/21/2015 04:06 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 10/21/2015 11:59 AM, R

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > >> >> OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call >> *mem" in >> aarch64 and some other targets. > > It is a fairly x86_64 specific optimization and doesn't apply to AArch64. > > The question really is

[PATCH][RTL-ifcvt] PR rtl-optimization/67749: Do not emit separate SET insn in IF-ELSE case

Hi all, This patch fixes the gcc.dg/ifcvt-2.c test for x86_64 where we were failing to if-convert. This was because in my patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=228194 which tried to emit a SET to move the source of insn_a or insn_b (that came from the test block) into

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

> > OK, then it's fairly x86-64 specific optimization, because we can't do "call > *mem" in > aarch64 and some other targets. It is a fairly x86_64 specific optimization and doesn't apply to AArch64. The question really is what impact does removing the generic code handling have on aarch64 -

[PATCH] Fix PR65962 fallout

This fixes another fallout of the PR65962 fix, gcc.dg/vect/vect-62.c failing for targets that use constant pool entries for the array initializer. On x86_64 we fail to vectorize the 2nd loop in the testcase because PRE makes the latch block non-empty (and adds a loop carried dependency). The pat

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR68067

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > > The following patch adjusts negate_expr_p to account for the fact > that we can't generally change a - (b - c) to (c - b) + a because > -INF - 0 is ok while 0 - -INF not. Similarly for a - (b + c). > While creating testcases I noticed that MULT_EXPR

[PATCH] Fix PR66313

When factoring a*b + a*c to (b + c)*a we have to guard against the case of a == 0 as after the factoring b + c might overflow in that case. Fixed by doing the addition in an unsigned type if required. Bootstrap / regtest pending on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Richard. 2015-10-27 Richard Biener

Re: [PATCH, VECTOR ABI] Add __attribute__((__simd__)) to GCC.

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 05:06:58PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Boostrapped. Regtesting is in progress. Is it ok for trunk if pass? > > gcc/ > * cp/parser.h (cp_parser): Add simd_attr_present. > * cp/parser.c (cp_parser_late_return_type_opt): Handle > simd_attr_present, > r

Re: [OpenACC 1/11] UNIQUE internal function

On 10/27/15 01:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 03:32:45PM -0700, Nathan Sidwell wrote: to break out the else part into a separate function. That's fine -- it'll copy the whole CFG of interest. The question is if some UNIQUE call could be ever considered as part of the chea

Re: Partial fix for LTO bootstrap with Ada

[ cc gcc-patches ] On 23/10/15 18:40, Eric Botcazou wrote: --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c @@ -5887,7 +5887,10 @@ intra_create_variable_infos (struct function *fn) if (POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (t)) && TYPE_RESTRICT (TREE_TYPE (t))) -

Re: [PATCH, VECTOR ABI] Add __attribute__((__simd__)) to GCC.

Hello Joseph, On 23 Oct 14:16, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > > > You need to update this patch to take account of Marek's fix for bug > > > 67964 > > > (it was because I was suspicious of the "continue;" in this patch > > > accepting invalid syntax that I f

Re: [OpenACC 1/11] UNIQUE internal function

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:03:40AM -0700, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 10/27/15 06:45, Richard Biener wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > >>Ok for me, but please wait for Richi's ack too. > > > >+ /* An IFN_UNIQUE call must be duplicated as part of its group, >

Re: [OpenACC 1/11] UNIQUE internal function

On 10/27/15 06:45, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Ok for me, but please wait for Richi's ack too. + /* An IFN_UNIQUE call must be duplicated as part of its group, +or not at all. */ + if (is_gimple_call (g) && gimple_call_inter

Re: [OpenACC 7/11] execution model

On 10/27/15 01:18, Jakub Jelinek wrote: LGTM, though could I ask you to try to try to move the struct oacc_collapse expand_oacc_collapse_init expand_oacc_collapse_vars expand_oacc_for additions somewhere else (e.g. in between expand_omp_taskreg and expand_omp_for_init_counts), ok, I wasn't su

  1   2   >