On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 08:31:38AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> Ok, so should we make the set of cum->bnds_in_bt based on
> flag_check_pointer_bounds flag?
>
> If so, I've got patch that I've tested on my x86_64-linux-gnu machin.
>
> Martin
> >From 7b5978e61305c5098a084c2352fcbacb4c347158 Mon S
On 03/21/2018 01:44 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:40:08PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
2018-03-21 Martin Liska
PR target/84988
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_function_arg_advance): Do not call
chkp_type_bounds_count if MPX is not enabled.
---
gcc/con
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:40:08PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> 2018-03-21 Martin Liska
>
> PR target/84988
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_function_arg_advance): Do not call
> chkp_type_bounds_count if MPX is not enabled.
> ---
> gcc/config/i386/i386.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed
On 03/21/2018 10:39 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 03/21/2018 10:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
Jeff Law writes:
On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
On 03/21/2018 10:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
Jeff Law writes:
On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it'
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Jeff Law writes:
>> On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
>>> As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it's acceptable. I don't want
>>>
Jeff Law writes:
> On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
>> As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it's acceptable. I don't want
>> to come
>> up with a new param for it.
>>
>> Survives tests&bootst
On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
> As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it's acceptable. I don't want
> to come
> up with a new param for it.
>
> Survives tests&bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
>
Hi.
This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it's acceptable. I don't want to come
up with a new param for it.
Survives tests&bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-03-20 Martin Liska
P
