OK to embedded-4_7-branch.
Thanks,
Joey
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This patch fixes failure of command "arm-none-eabi-gcc -O2 -mthumb
> -mtune=cortex-m4 ..." on arm/embedded-4_7-branch by removing the assertion
> in arm_cortex_v7m_branch_cost.
>
> Is it OK?
>
> Than
Ramana,
This issue also impacts ldrexh/ldrexb, as assembler doesn't accept
ldrexh r1, [r0, #0]. May it be backported to 4.7 by now?
Thanks - Joey
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> Hi ,
>
>
> While testing my neon intrinsics work with some testcases
> that
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> Looks fine to me.
>
> Ian
Will backport to arm/embedded-4_7-branch. No sure if appropriate for
4.7 branch since it is not a stability problem.
- Joey
I'm sorry the conversation about this patch went to private
incidentally. Resend the key point.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Julian Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:48:22 +0800
> Ye Joey wrote:
>
>> Since v7m and v6m are very different. It is high desired to hav
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 03/31/2012 01:38 AM, Ye Joey wrote:
>
> Yes, if you mean spilling in LRA. But IRA can assign union of general and
> SSE classes to a pseudo if it is profitable.
Any chance for IRA not to do so, saying by introducing an option?
- Joey
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch implements general spilling one class pseudos
> into another class hard registers *instead of memory* in LRA.
Can't find the patch itself
- Joey
Ping^2
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Ye Joey wrote:
> Ping
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ye Joey wrote:
>> Fix PR51200. Backport trunk 182545, 182649, 182685 to 4.6.
>>
>> OK to 4.6?
>>
>> - Joey
>>
>> 2011-12-2
Ping
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ye Joey wrote:
> Fix PR51200. Backport trunk 182545, 182649, 182685 to 4.6.
>
> OK to 4.6?
>
> - Joey
>
> 2011-12-20 Bernd Schmidt
>
> PR middle-end/51200
> * expr.c (store_field): Avoid a dire
Committed to arm/embedded-4_6-branch.
2011-12-26 Joey Ye
Revert original fix and backport r182545, 182649 from mainline
Revert:
2011-11-18 Joey Ye
Port Bernd's fix to volatile bitfields
2010-12-02 Bernd Schmidt
* expr.c (store_field): Avo
Fix PR51200. Backport trunk 182545, 182649, 182685 to 4.6.
OK to 4.6?
- Joey
2011-12-20 Bernd Schmidt
PR middle-end/51200
* expr.c (store_field): Avoid a direct store if the mode is larger
than the size of the bit field.
* stor-layout.c (layout_decl):
Writing to rbp will damage stack frame. Though it is a compile only
case, better not to write rbp.
OK to s/rbp/r13 when commit it?
- Joey
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes the bug PR43491, which exists at least on
> arm-none-eabi/mips-elf
> targets.
>
This has been fixed by Bernd's recent commit. Add a target independent
test case to track regression.
OK to trunk and 4.6?
Joey Ye
* gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.c: New test.
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.c (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.
Committed.
2011-12-22 Joey Ye
* toplev.c (process_options): Fix typo.
Index: gcc/toplev.c
===
--- gcc/toplev.c(revision 182646)
+++ gcc/toplev.c(working copy)
@@ -1332,7 +1332,7 @@
if (flag_strict_volatil
This should be in 4.6 too
- Joey
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/29/11 17:35, Mitchell, Mark wrote:
So, I still think this patch is the best way to go forward, and it
>>> does
fix incorrect code generation. Would appreciate an OK.
>>>
>>> Ping.
>>
>> If y
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/29/11 17:35, Mitchell, Mark wrote:
So, I still think this patch is the best way to go forward, and it
>>> does
fix incorrect code generation. Would appreciate an OK.
>>>
>>> Ping.
>>
>> If you don't hear any objections within
Ping, PR middle-end/51200
Tailored from Bernd's, and added target independent test case. Now it
is a pure middle-end fix.
OK for trunk and 4.6?
Bernd Schmidt
gcc/
* expr.c (store_field): Avoid a direct store if the mode is larger
than the size of the bit field.
To raise awareness, a track at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51200
- Joey
Ping
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Joey Ye wrote:
> Trunk gcc mis-handles following volatile bitfield case on ARM target:
>
> $ cat a.c
> extern void check(int);
> typedef struct {
> volatile unsigned short a:8, b:8;
> } BitStruct;
> BitStruct bits = {1, 2};
> int main ()
> {
> check(bits.a
Backport mainline r179330 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch
Committed.
2011-09-29 Joey Ye
Backport r179330 from mainline
2011-09-29 Jiangning Liu
* gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/predcom-1.c: Explicitly turn on
loop unroll and set max unroll times to 8.
* g
Julian,
This patch works for register ld/st, but doesn't work for immediate,
as showed in example.
Would you further improve it for imm?
Thanks - Joey
$ arm-none-eabi-gcc -v 2>&1 | grep version
gcc version 4.7.0 20110922 (experimental) [trunk revision 179074] (GCC)
$ cat u.c
struct packed_str
{
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Thomas Klein wrote:
> +static int
> +stack_check_work_registers (rtx *workreg)
> +{
> + int reg, i, k, n, nregs;
> +
> + if (crtl->args.info.pcs_variant <= ARM_PCS_AAPCS_LOCAL)
> +{
> + nregs = crtl->args.info.aapcs_next_ncrn;
> +}
> + else
> +n
Ping ^ 2
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Ye Joey wrote:
> Ping
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Joey Ye wrote:
>>
>> This patch fixes PR49437 with a single line change in ARM backend
>> and a regression test case for ARM target
>>
>> ChangeL
Remove Xuepeng Guo and Joey Ye from owners of branches that we're no
longer maintaining.
Index: svn.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/svn.html,v
retrieving revision 1.163
diff -u -p -r1.163 svn.html
--- svn.html8 Aug 2011
Ping
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Joey Ye wrote:
>
> This patch fixes PR49437 with a single line change in ARM backend
> and a regression test case for ARM target
>
> ChangeLog:
> 2011-08-02 Matthew Gretton-Dann
> PR target/49437
> * config/arm/arm.c (arm_output_epilogue): Pro
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Thomas Klein wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> This is a ping of (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg01226.html).
> Repeating my request.
>
> I would like to have a stack check for threads with small amount of stack
> space per thread.
> (I'm using a ARM Cortex-M3 micr
25 matches
Mail list logo
