Hi,
GCC revision 267634 implemented two_value_replacement function.
However, a typo occurred during the parameter check, which caused
us to miss some optimizations.
The intent of the code might be to check that the input parameters
are const int and their difference is one. However, when I read
Hi,
I'd like to gentle ping for this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00966.html
OK for trunk now?
Thanks!
on 2019/3/20 上午11:14, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please refer to below link for previous threads.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00348.html
>
> Compa
Hmm, mis-attached the old version patch. Here is the updated one.
Thanks,
bin
--
Sender:bin.cheng
Sent At:2019 May 5 (Sun.) 13:54
Recipient:Richard Biener
Cc:GCC Patches
Subject:Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow
> --
> Sender:Jakub Jelinek
> Sent At:2019 Apr. 17 (Wed.) 19:27
> Recipient:Bin.Cheng
> Cc:bin.cheng ; GCC Patches
>
> Subject:Re: [PATCH PR90078]Capping comp_cost computation in ivopts
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 07:14:05PM +0
on 2019/5/5 下午12:04, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:23 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
+ /* Some compare iv_use is probably useless once the doloop optimization
+ performs. */
+ if (tailor_cmp_p)
+tailor_cmp_uses (data);
>>> Function tailor_cmp_uses sets iv_use->ze
> --
> Sender:Richard Biener
> Sent At:2019 Apr. 29 (Mon.) 20:01
> Recipient:bin.cheng
> Cc:GCC Patches ; mliska
> Subject:Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow by introducing
> scaling bound
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2
on 2019/4/27 上午11:44, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 2:44 PM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> +
>> + /* zero cost use makes it easier to select memory based iv cand
>> + for replacement of non memory based iv and its use. But if
>> + the setup sequence are too costly, loop iv
On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:23 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> Hi Bin,
>
> Sorry for late response (just back from vacation).
>
> Thanks very much for your comments.
>
> on 2019/4/27 上午11:20, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> > For such non-trivial patch, we can improve review process by splitting
> > to smaller patches w
on 2019/4/27 上午12:59, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 10:26:52PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> on 2019/4/26 下午3:16, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> We should think about possible ways of encoding doloop at IVOPTs
>>> time rather than trying to re-analyze at RTL. I suppose we can
>>> eas
Hi Bin,
Sorry for late response (just back from vacation).
Thanks very much for your comments.
on 2019/4/27 上午11:20, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> For such non-trivial patch, we can improve review process by splitting
> to smaller patches which can be reviewed/approved independently.
Good idea! I'll split
在 2019/3/26 下午7:40, JunMa 写道:
Hi
According to gnu document of function attributes, neither weakref nor
alias
could be attached to a function defined in current translation unit.
Although GCC checks the attributes under some circumstances, it still
fails
on some cases and even causes ICE.
Th
在 2019/3/21 下午12:51, JunMa 写道:
Hi
For now, gcc can not fold code like:
const char a[5] = "123"
__builtin_memchr (a, '7', sizeof a)
It tries to avoid folding out of string length although length of a is 5.
This is a bit conservative, it's safe to folding memchr/bcmp/memcmp
builtins when constant
Hi
On 04/30, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 4/30/19 8:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:57:20AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>> Just curious, do we want to add math identities like above to match.pd ?
> >> I'd think so.
> >>
> >>
> >>> In practice, I am not sure how often we'd see "ta
Hi Jeff,
Yes. The latter one "[PATCH] improve ifcvt optimization (PR
rtl-optimization/89430)" supersedes the earlier one " Fixing ifcvt issue as
exposed by BZ89430".
Thanks,
-Jiangning
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 11:54 PM
To: JiangNing OS ; gcc-pat
Kyrill Tkachov writes:
> @@ -764,6 +780,13 @@ (define_insn "aarch64_adalp_3"
> ;; UABAL tmp.8h, op1.16b, op2.16b
> ;; UADALPop3.4s, tmp.8h
> ;; MOV op0, op3 // should be eliminated in later passes.
> +;;
> +;; For TARGET_DOTPROD we do:
> +;; MOV tmp1.16b, #1 // Can b
On 04/05/19 17:43 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
Am Sa., 4. Mai 2019 um 16:37 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
* include/std/system_error (error_category, error_code)
(error_condition): Improve docs.
* libsupc++/exception: Add missing @addtogroup Doxygen command.
* li
Am Sa., 4. Mai 2019 um 16:37 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
>
> * include/std/system_error (error_category, error_code)
> (error_condition): Improve docs.
> * libsupc++/exception: Add missing @addtogroup Doxygen command.
> * libsupc++/exception_ptr.h (exception_ptr):
In this implementation it is an error to pass the empty path to absolute,
because the empty path doesn't represent any file in the filesystem so
the function cannot meet its postcondition.
Currently the absolute(const path&, error_code&) overload reports an
error for the empty path, but using err
* include/std/system_error (error_category, error_code)
(error_condition): Improve docs.
* libsupc++/exception: Add missing @addtogroup Doxygen command.
* libsupc++/exception_ptr.h (exception_ptr): Link equality operators
to class documentation. Suppress doc
On 03/05/19 23:42 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 23/03/17 17:49 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 12/03/17 13:16 +0100, Daniel Krügler wrote:
The following is an *untested* patch suggestion, please verify.
Notes: My interpretation is that hash should be
defined outside of the _GLIBCXX_COMPATI
Committed to CVS.
Index: htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.65
diff -u -r1.65 changes.html
--- htdocs/gcc-9/changes.html 3 May 2019 12:26:31 - 1.65
+++ htdoc
On Fri, 3 May 2019, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> We are proud to announce the next, major release of the
> GNU Compiler Collection.
I noticed that the latest GCC 9 snapshot actually identifies itself
as GCC 10 since it's been carved from trunk, not the release branch.
The update below, which I committe
On 04/05/19 09:31 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
This patch allows to run pretty printer tests in _GLIBCXX_DEBUG
mode. If accepted we could even integrate the pretty printers tests
within the check-debug target like it is done for the check target.
* python/libstdcxx/v6/printers.p
Przemyslaw Wirkus writes:
> Hi Richard,
> New patch adds a new IFN_SIGNBIT internal function that maps
> to signbit_optab.
Thanks.
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2019-05-05 Przemyslaw Wirkus
>
> * gcc/internal-fn.def (SIGNBIT): New.
> * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md (signbitv4sf2): New
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the Russian team of translators. The file is available at:
https://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/ru.po
(This file, 'gcc-9.1-b20190414.ru.po',
Richard Biener writes:
> On Fri, 3 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>
>> I am testing the following patch to remove the code determining
>> the target virtual operand to walk to and instead compute it
>> based on the immediate dominator which we will reach anyways
>> (or a dominating block) dur
Already committed, as per https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/svnwrite.html.
2019-05-04 Roland Illig
* MAINTAINERS (Write After Approval): Add myself.
Index: MAINTAINERS
===
--- MAINTAINERS (Revision 270868)
+++ MAINTAINERS (
Hi
This patch allows to run pretty printer tests in _GLIBCXX_DEBUG
mode. If accepted we could even integrate the pretty printers tests
within the check-debug target like it is done for the check target.
* python/libstdcxx/v6/printers.py (add_one_template_type_printer):
Add type p
28 matches
Mail list logo
