> On 2018-12-03 12:00 p.m., Michael Ploujnikov wrote:
> > On 2018-12-01 11:29 a.m., H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> This caused:
> >>
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
> >>
> >
> > Sorry about that. Looks like I should have been testing with
> > --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto rather t
On 2018-12-03 12:00 p.m., Michael Ploujnikov wrote:
> On 2018-12-01 11:29 a.m., H.J. Lu wrote:
>> This caused:
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
>>
>
> Sorry about that. Looks like I should have been testing with
> --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto rather than just --enable-
On 2018-12-01 11:29 a.m., H.J. Lu wrote:
> This caused:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
>
Sorry about that. Looks like I should have been testing with
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto rather than just --enable-bootstrap.
The quick fix would be to undo the patch to create
Hi,
On 2018-11-30 2:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote:
> + unsigned &clone_number = lto_clone_numbers->get_or_insert (
> + IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (decl)));
>name = maybe_rewrite_identifier (name);
>symtab->change_decl_assembler_name (decl,
> - clone_function_name_numbered (
>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 10:09 PM Michael Ploujnikov
wrote:
>
> Continuing from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg00228.html
>
> It took longer than expected, but I've finally rebased this on top of
> the new clone_function_name* API and included the requested
> optimizations.
>
> There
On 2018-11-28 5:49 p.m., Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:09:14PM -0500, Michael Ploujnikov wrote:
>> I've also included a small change to rs6000 which I'm pretty sure is
>> safe, but I have no way of testing.
>
> Do you have an account on the GCC Compile Farm?
> htt
Hi!
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:09:14PM -0500, Michael Ploujnikov wrote:
> I've also included a small change to rs6000 which I'm pretty sure is
> safe, but I have no way of testing.
Do you have an account on the GCC Compile Farm?
https://cfarm.tetaneutral.net/
There are some nice Power machines in
Continuing from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg00228.html
It took longer than expected, but I've finally rebased this on top of
the new clone_function_name* API and included the requested
optimizations.
There are a few remaining spots where we could probably apply similar
optimizat
