On 11/19/16 00:52, Martin Sebor wrote:
> If you or others are concerned about the rate of false positives
> of this warning please point me at a code base that might be a good
> test bed to to try it on. Besides GCC I've built Binutils and the
> Linux kernel with just the 5 instances in GCC.
>
yo
On 11/19/16 00:52, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/18/2016 03:51 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> > of the builtin (the function is not declared without attribute
>> > alloc_size, at least in Glibc, but GCC still expands it inline).
>> > This is as simple as enclosing alloca in parentheses:
>> >
>> >
Hi Naveen,
On 18/11/16 16:30, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote:
@@ -1374,10 +1374,17 @@ aarch64_load_symref_appropriately (rtx dest, rtx imm,
case SYMBOL_SMALL_TLSGD:
{
rtx_insn *insns;
- rtx result = gen_rtx_REG (Pmode, R0_REGNUM);
+ rtx result;
+ if (TARGET_ILP3
This patch forces gcc to link against libgcc.a when creating shared
libraries, needed for 64-bit multiplies.
Bootstrapped and tested on tilepro hardware, also backported to GCC 6.
2016-11-18 Walter Lee
* config.host (tilepro*-*-linux*): Add t-slibgcc-libgcc.
diff --git a/libgcc/confi
This patch fixes a bundling bug. When there are consecutive barriers,
the end-of-bundle marker of the last barrier is getting dropped.
Bootstrapped and tested on tilegx hardware, also backported to GCC 6.
2016-11-18 Walter Lee
* config/tilegx/tilegx.c (tilegx_gen_bundles): Preserve
This patch fixes the clzsi2 pattern, which was broken for big-endian.
Bootstrapped and tested on tilegx hardware, also backported to GCC 6.
2016-11-18 Walter Lee
* config/tilegx/tilegx.md (clzsi2): Fix for big-endian.
--- a/gcc/config/tilegx/tilegx.md
+++ b/gcc/config/tilegx/tilegx.m
On 11/18/16 23:15, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>> - TREE_NOTHROW (olddecl) = 0;
>>> + TREE_NOTHROW (olddecl) = TREE_NOTHROW (newdecl);
>>
>> I still think a better fix would be to add a copy of TREE_NOTHROW to the
>> else block of the if (types_match), to go with the existing copies of
>> TREE
This patch eliminates the use of CUDA unified shared memory via cuMemcpy
inside nvptx_exec. The major problem with unified memory is that the
CUDA driver needs to copy all of the host addresses to a special data
region prior to transferring the data to and from the accelerator. I'm
not sure why the
Hi!
I've noticed in i686-linux bootstrap:
FAIL: g++.dg/cpp1y/pr68180.C -std=c++14 (test for excess errors)
This is due to using of vector argument in a function, without
corresponding vector ISA enabled (SSE).
Fixed thusly, committed to trunk as obvious.
2016-11-18 Jakub Jelinek
PR
On 11/18/2016 03:51 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> of the builtin (the function is not declared without attribute
> alloc_size, at least in Glibc, but GCC still expands it inline).
> This is as simple as enclosing alloca in parentheses:
>
> void *p = (alloca)(n);
>
> Ugly? Perhaps. One mi
On Wednesday 02 November 2016, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> -case 11: c+=((hashval_t)k[10]<<24);
> -case 10: c+=((hashval_t)k[9]<<16);
> -case 9 : c+=((hashval_t)k[8]<<8);
> +case 11: c+=((hashval_t)k[10]<<24); /* fall through */
> +case 10: c+=((hashval_t)k[9]<<16); /* f
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:52:12PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:43:40PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:38:38PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > > This patch tweaks the movdi constraints for the PowerPC to use "^" or "$"
> > > constra
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:43:40PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:38:38PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > This patch tweaks the movdi constraints for the PowerPC to use "^" or "$"
> > constraints instead of "?*". This allows the register allocator to more
> > oft
> of the builtin (the function is not declared without attribute
> alloc_size, at least in Glibc, but GCC still expands it inline).
> This is as simple as enclosing alloca in parentheses:
>
> void *p = (alloca)(n);
>
> Ugly? Perhaps. One might say that code that does tricky or
No. I dou
On 11/18/2016 03:57 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Martin: are the changes to your test cases OK by you, or is there
a better way to rewrite them?
Thanks for looking into it!
Since the purpose of the test_sprintf_note function in the test is
to
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 22:13 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > + /* Consume all tokens, up to the closing brace, handling
> > + matching pairs of braces in the rtl dump. */
> > + int num_open_braces = 1;
> > + while (1)
> > +{
> > + switch
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:38:38PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> This patch tweaks the movdi constraints for the PowerPC to use "^" or "$"
> constraints instead of "?*". This allows the register allocator to more often
> allocate DImode to a floating point/vector register when it is desirable t
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > Martin: are the changes to your test cases OK by you, or is there
> > a better way to rewrite them?
>
> Thanks for looking into it!
>
> Since the purpose of the test_sprintf_note function in the test is
> to verify the location of the car
On 11/18/16 22:19, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/05/2016 12:44 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> + warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (newdecl), 0,
>> + "declaration of %q+#D conflicts with built-in "
>> + "declaration %q#D", newdecl, olddecl);
>
> There needs to be a way
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, David Malcolm wrote:
> + /* Consume all tokens, up to the closing brace, handling
> + matching pairs of braces in the rtl dump. */
> + int num_open_braces = 1;
> + while (1)
> +{
> + switch (c_parser_peek_token (parser)->type)
> + {
> + case CPP_OPEN_B
On November 18, 2016 10:45:10 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>Hi!
>
>As the testcase shows, expand_divmod doesn't handle properly
>division/remainder in modes larger than HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT like
>TImode - if op1 is "negative" CONST_INT, it means it has 65 most
>significant
>bits set, but
On November 18, 2016 10:41:06 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>Hi!
>
>The following testcase ICEs because of buffer overflow in the
>expand_target_clones function. The main bug is that get_attr_str
>doesn't count the commas in the strings, so while it handles
>__attribute__((target_clones ("a
On 11/18/2016 10:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:14:09AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Because people make mistakes and warnings help us avoid them (isn't
that obvious?) Just because we get it right most of the time doesn't
mean we get right all of the time. The papers and
The yearly m68k day or two of bugfixing for the retro-computing folks is
under way. It's earlier than last year, so I can do more than just fix
regressions.
This BZ is a simple request to optimize sequences like:
moveq #1,%d1
cmp.l %d0, %d1
beq/bne
into
subq.l #1, %d0
beq/bne
When d0/d1 ar
Hi!
As the testcase shows, expand_divmod doesn't handle properly
division/remainder in modes larger than HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT like
TImode - if op1 is "negative" CONST_INT, it means it has 65 most significant
bits set, but EXACT_POWER_OF_2_OR_ZERO_P will happily return true on that
and optimize t
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs because of buffer overflow in the
expand_target_clones function. The main bug is that get_attr_str
doesn't count the commas in the strings, so while it handles
__attribute__((target_clones ("avx", "foo", "avx2", "avx512f", "default")))
it doesn't handle
__attribute
On 11/05/2016 12:44 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
+ warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (newdecl), 0,
+ "declaration of %q+#D conflicts with built-in "
+ "declaration %q#D", newdecl, olddecl);
There needs to be a way to disable this warning,
OK.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> My recent optimize_abbrev_table optimization apparently broke Solaris
> bootstrap.
> The bug is specific I think just to -gdwarf-{2,3} -gno-strict-dwarf, where
> DW_FORM_exprloc can't be used for location expressions and some loc
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Not really sure if we want to call just check_abi_tags (based on the idea
> that likely any uses of the TLS var from other TUs will be broken),
I think that's fine. OK.
Jason
Hi Dominique,
>> the attached patch fixes an ice-on-valid problem, simply by removing an
>> assert. ...
>
> I have several instances in my test suite showing that the proposed patch
> removes the ICE but generates wrong code:
>
> pr42359, second test, => ICE on another place
> pr54613, sixth and
On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 14:24 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:07 PM, David Malcolm
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 16:14 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:15 PM, David Malcolm <
> > > dmalc...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Changed in this v
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 17:55 +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/05/2016 06:15 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > - /* Make sure regno_pointer_align, and regno_reg_rtx are large
> > - enough to have an element for this pseudo reg number. */
> > + int cur_size = crtl->emit.regno_pointer_align_length
This patch tweaks the movdi constraints for the PowerPC to use "^" or "$"
constraints instead of "?*". This allows the register allocator to more often
allocate DImode to a floating point/vector register when it is desirable to do
so.
I did a full Spec 2006 run with this patch installed, and most
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 08:41:01PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> I'm seeing lots of ICEs with this.
Here is untested fix for that, will bootstrap/regtest it soon (after my
current set of bootstraps finishes).
2016-11-18 Jakub Jelinek
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_builtin): Remove
On 11/18/2016 11:46 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/18/2016 12:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 05:32:31PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
The point is warning on an alloca (0) may not be as clear cut as it
might seem. It's probably a reasonable thing to do on the host, but on
a target
On 11/18/2016 11:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
[snip]
I think it would be be ideal if all the options were sorted the same
way in all sections. Is there some command to have texinfo sort them
for us? If not, can we write a script to sort them, either each time
just before generating the docs or m
Just need to pass the flags down.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 6aee56eb70ff04c9c1fbcbef388144d4a0338154
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri Nov 18 10:04:49 2016 -0500
PR c++/67631 - list-init and explicit conversions
* semantics.c (finish_compo
Hi!
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 02:18:57PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > Hi HJ, could you please commit it?
>
> Done.
I'm seeing lots of ICEs with this.
E.g. reduced:
typedef float __m128 __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16), __may_alias__));
typedef unsigned char __mmask8;
typedef float __v4sf __attr
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 2:45 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> So the current suggestion is to combine my fixincludes patch and Jack's
>> patch to disable use if !__BLOCKS__.
>
>> I guess this is ok for mainline now to restore bootstrap?
>
> I think we
On 11/18/2016 11:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I think it would be be ideal if all the options were sorted the same
way in all sections. Is there some command to have texinfo sort them
for us? If not, can we write a script to sort them, either each time
just before generating the docs or manually
On 11/18/2016 10:38 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/18/2016 09:01 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch.
I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i
On 11/18/2016 12:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 05:32:31PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
The point is warning on an alloca (0) may not be as clear cut as it
might seem. It's probably a reasonable thing to do on the host, but on
a target, which might be embedded and explicitly
On 11/17/2016 05:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I confess I haven't heard of such an implementation before but after
some searching I have managed to find a few examples of it online,
such as in QNX or in the BlackBerry SDK, or in the GCC shipped by
Texas Instruments. For instance:
I have the "adva
On 11/08/2016 08:13 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The -fprintf-return-value optimization has been disabled since
the last time it caused a bootstrap failure on powerpc64le. With
the underlying problems fixed GCC has bootstrapped fine on all of
powerpc64, powerpc64le and x86_64 and tested with no regre
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 03:37:17PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch set enables the _Float16 type specified in ISO/IEC TS 18661-3
> for AArch64 and ARM. The patch set has been posted over the past two months,
> with many of the target-independent changes approved. I'm reposti
This patch simply moves the schedt (aka Sched) type and the sched
variable from C to Go. This is a step toward further changes.
Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed
to mainline.
Ian
Index: gcc/go/gofrontend/MERGE
On Nov 18, 2016, at 2:45 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> So the current suggestion is to combine my fixincludes patch and Jack's
> patch to disable use if !__BLOCKS__.
> I guess this is ok for mainline now to restore bootstrap?
I think we are down to everyone likes this, Ok. The big question is, does
On 11/18/2016 09:01 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch.
I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i.e.,
documented the negative of the option rather
2016-11-17 20:01 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law :
> On 11/17/2016 09:56 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
>>
>> 2016-11-17 18:50 GMT+03:00 Rainer Orth :
>>>
>>> Rainer Orth writes:
>>>
I happened to notice that my libcilkrts SPARC port has been applied
upstream. So to reach closure on this issue for the GCC 7
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:19:31PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> I’d like to do that; is there a way to force a jump table for a limited set
> of cases?
> (the example was about the smallest I could get where GCC elected to produce
> a jump table instead of branches)
--param case-values-threshol
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:14:09AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Because people make mistakes and warnings help us avoid them (isn't
> that obvious?) Just because we get it right most of the time doesn't
> mean we get right all of the time. The papers and exploits I pointed
> to should provide amp
Hi Christophe,
On 11/18/2016 03:03 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
Part of the new testcase added with this commit fails on arm* targets:
g++.dg/pr78112.C scan-assembler-times DW_AT_object_pointer 37
Thank you for the report.
As I said on the bugzilla
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
I think restoring bootstrap is likely a good thing.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 2:45 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
>
> I guess this is ok for mainline now to restore bootstrap?
On 11/14/2016 01:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
You can either choose a signed/unsigned form not giving the consumer
a hint about the size of the underlying constant value or one of the
sized data forms that don't give a hint about the value
representation/signedness. So in both cases the consumer l
On 16/11/16 16:53, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> ieee_support_halting only checked the availability of status
> flags, not trapping support. On some targets the later can
> only be checked at runtime: feenableexcept reports if
> enabling traps failed.
>
> So check trapping support by enabling/disabling
Hi Mike,
> On 18 Nov 2016, at 17:16, Mike Stump wrote:
>
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 4:33 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>> As discussed on IRC, I was under the impression that it is desired to move
>> away from #ifdef towards if() and I have been adding those where locally
>> things have been touched
On Nov 18, 2016, at 4:33 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> As discussed on IRC, I was under the impression that it is desired to move
> away from #ifdef towards if() and I have been adding those where locally
> things have been touched - in this case it was only partially possible.
>
> However, FAOD
On 11/18/2016 09:29 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
In the libiberty/alloca.c, I don't see anything special about alloca (0).
Yes, alloca (0) reclaims garbage, but so does alloca (1) and alloca (4035).
alloca (0) just returns NULL after it.
Hi!
I'd like to ping 2 patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01074.html
- C++ ABI - mangling of TLS aux symbols; either the posted
patch or one with if (abi_version_at_least (11))
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00351.html
- DWARF Solaris bootstrap fix
Jak
Hi,
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> If inner is a MEM, make_extraction requires that pos is a multiple of
> bytes and deals with offsetting it. Or otherwise requires that pos is a
> multiple of BITS_PER_WORD and for REG inner it handles that too. But if
> inner is something diffe
Hi Andre,
Btw, when using the in gcc-7 available
polymorphic assign, then v6 is actually auto-allocated and the program runs
fine. So what are your opinions on the auto-allocation issue?
It is my experience that such questions can speedily and correctly
be answered by the regulars on comp.lan
Hi all,
attached patch fixes the issue which was given by nesting calls to typebound
procedures. The expression of the inner typebound procedure call was resolved
correctly, but in the case of it's having a class type the ref-list was
discarded. Leaving the list of references untouched, resolves t
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>
>> B) Depending on ilp, I think below test strings fail for long time with
>> haswell:
>> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Executing predictive commoning
>> without unrolling" 1 "pcom" { tar
On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:13 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Thanks, at least I’m not going completely crazy ;-)
I'll just note for completeness that Jeff also couldn't explain a failure of
your latest patch. If you run into one, let me know.
> OK now for trunk?
Ok.
> open branches?
Ok.
Hi,
This is a rework of https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg02007.html.
Though review comments suggested it could be merged with last kind
simplification
of fold_cond_expr_with_comparison, it's not really applicable. As a matter of
fact,
the suggestion stands for patch
@https://gcc
Hi,
This is a follow up patch for
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01898.html
It moves remaining simplification for (A == C1) ? A : C2 in
fold_cond_expr_with_comparison
to match.pd. Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and AArch64, is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2016-11-17 Bin Cheng
*
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> B) Depending on ilp, I think below test strings fail for long time with
> haswell:
> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Executing predictive commoning
> without unrolling" 1 "pcom" { target lp64 } } }
> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Executing
Martin: are the changes to your test cases OK by you, or is there
a better way to rewrite them?
Thanks for looking into it!
Since the purpose of the test_sprintf_note function in the test is
to verify the location of the caret within the warnings I think we
should keep it if it's possible. Wou
On 11/18/16, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> >In the libiberty/alloca.c, I don't see anything special about alloca
>> > (0).
>> >Yes, alloca (0) reclaims garbage, but so does alloca (1) and alloca
>> > (4035).
>> >alloca (0) just returns NULL
On 11/11/16 14:35, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 08/11/16 13:36, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Ping?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 25/10/16 18:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi,
Currently when a user compiles for a thumb-only target (such as Cortex-M
processors) without specifying the -mthumb option GCC thr
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf
> wrote:
>
> On 2016.11.18 at 10:27 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> ===
>> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr78413.c (revision 0)
>> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr78413.c
Committed as r242595.
Thanks,
Toma Tabacu
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 242594)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2016-11-18 Toma Tabacu
+
+ * MAINTAINERS (Write After Approval): Add myself.
+
On 2016.11.18 at 10:27 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> ===
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr78413.c (revision 0)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr78413.c (working copy)
> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
> +/* PR78413. These previously fai
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 09:21:38AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >In the libiberty/alloca.c, I don't see anything special about alloca (0).
> >Yes, alloca (0) reclaims garbage, but so does alloca (1) and alloca (4035).
> >alloca (0) just returns NULL after it. The diffutils link is the same
> >allo
Hi,
The if-conversion patch for PR77848 missed a case where an outer loop
should not be versioned for vectorization; this was caught by an assert
in tests recorded in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78413.
This patch fixes the problem by ensuring that both inner and outer loop
latches
On 11/18/2016 12:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 05:32:31PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
The point is warning on an alloca (0) may not be as clear cut as it
might seem. It's probably a reasonable thing to do on the host, but on
a target, which might be embedded and explicitly
This patch to libgo changes the environment support routines to not
call __go_alloc/__go_free, but to instead use malloc/free. This code
just needs temporary buffers, it is natural to write it in C because
it calls setenv/unsetenv, and C code can safely call malloc/free but
with the future GC can
On 11/17/2016 10:34 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/16/2016 09:49 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm looking for an approval of the attached patch.
I've adjusted the documentation based on Sandra's input (i.e.,
documented the negative of the option rather than the positive;
thank you for the review,
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > On Nov 14 2016, Michael Matz wrote:
> >
> >> PR missed-optimization/77881
> >> * combine.c (simplify_comparison): Remove useless subregs
> >> also inside the loop, not just a
On 18 November 2016 at 16:46, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> It is very strange that this test failed on arm, since it requires
> target avx2 to check vectorizer dumps:
>
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "LOOP VECTORIZED" 2 "vect" {
> target avx2_runtime } } } */
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-t
On 11/18/16 12:58, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 17 November 2016 at 10:23, Kyrill Tkachov
> wrote:
>>
>> On 09/11/16 12:58, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>
>>> This patch enables the ldrd/strd peephole rules unconditionally.
>>>
>>> It is meant to fix cases, where the patch to reduce the
It is very strange that this test failed on arm, since it requires
target avx2 to check vectorizer dumps:
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "LOOP VECTORIZED" 2 "vect" {
target avx2_runtime } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "LOOP EPILOGUE VECTORIZED
\\(VS=16\\)" 2 "vect" { target avx
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Nov 14 2016, Michael Matz wrote:
>
>> PR missed-optimization/77881
>> * combine.c (simplify_comparison): Remove useless subregs
>> also inside the loop, not just after it.
>> (make_compound_operation): Recognize s
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-2.c is showing intermittent failures, which
valgrind shows to be a read past the end of a buffer.
The root cause is that the on-demand substring loc code isn't set up
to cope with -ftrack-macro-expansion != 2 (the default).
In the failing case, it attempts to use t
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 08:02:08AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > IN_RANGE(POS...) makes sure that POS is a non-negative number
> > smaller than UPPER, so (UPPER) - (POS) does not wrap. Or is there
> > some case that the new mac
The directories old/regexp and old/template were removed from the
master Go library in 2012 (https://golang.org/cl/5979046) but somehow
that was not reflected in libgo. This patch removes them from libgo.
Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed
to mainline.
Ian
patc
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 02:48:30PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * gcc.target/s390/htm-builtins-1.c (DEFAULT_MAX_REPETITIONS)
> (DEFAULT_REQUIRED_QUORUM, NUM_WARMUP_RUNS): Lower requirements for
> successful test.
> * gcc.target/s390/htm-builtins-
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:33:16AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog
>
> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_stack_info): PR/77359: Properly align
> local variables in functions calling alloca. Also update the ASCII
> drawings
> * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (STARTING_FRA
Hi Janus,
> the attached patch fixes an ice-on-valid problem, simply by removing an
> assert. ...
I have several instances in my test suite showing that the proposed patch
removes the ICE but generates wrong code:
pr42359, second test, => ICE on another place
pr54613, sixth and eighth tests,
On 10 November 2016 at 12:06, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 10:02 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> Using scan-assembler-times on the dwarf?
>
>
> I always have a bad feeling about this kind of check as I imagine it can
> break very easily with legit changes. But I have nothing better
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> How about this:
>
> --
> /* A convenience macro to determine whether a SIZE lies inclusively
>within [1, UPPER], POS lies inclusively within between
>[0, UPPER - 1] and the sum lies inclusively within [1, UPPER].
>UPPER mu
On 18 November 2016 at 15:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I agree, but if we'd just refused to support such undefined behaviour
> in stage 1 we wouldn't now be in a position of saying we can't change
> it in stage 3.
I want to support the code that the previous attempt breaks. I don't
think I can do
On 17/11/16 23:38 +0200, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
The first patch does everything but the container adaptor parts (which
are wrong in the p/r) and the tuple part (which is icky). The second
part does the tuple parts, and needs some serious RFC. I know
it's ugly as sin, but it works. I don't think
Joseph Myers writes:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Richard Sandiford writes:
>> > This isn't intended to change the behaviour, just rewrite the
>> > existing logic in a different (and hopefully clearer) way.
>> > The new form -- particularly the part based on the "block"
>> >
The attached patch makes the htm tests on s390 less sensitive to
spurious abort. Please check the commit comment for details. The
modified tests have been run once on a zEC12.
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
* gcc.target/s390/htm-builtins-1.
Currently, Binutils still comes with an AVR_TINY linker description file
which puts .rodata into RAM so that LDS is applicable for reading such
objects.
However, as these devices come with a linearised address model, linker
descriptions which put .rodata into flash are much more reasonable.
T
On 15 November 2016 at 15:41, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is patch for non-masked epilogue vectoriziation.
>
> Bootstrap and regression testing did not show any new failures.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
>
> Thanks.
> Changelog:
>
> 2016-11-15 Yuri Rumyantsev
>
> * params.def (PARAM_VE
On 11 November 2016 at 09:56, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
>> On 10 November 2016 at 09:34, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 9 November 2016 at 09:36, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:11
On 17 November 2016 at 15:24, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 17 November 2016 at 14:21, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Richard,
>> >> Following your suggestion in PR78154, the patch checks i
Hi all,
the attached patch fixes an ice-on-valid problem, simply by removing
an assert. The generated code works as expected and the patch regtests
cleanly on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
Cheers,
Janus
2016-11-18 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78392
* trans-array.c (gfc_trans_auto_array_
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
