On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
How did you test this patch?
Normally, a patch submission comes with text like, "Bootstrapped &
tested on ..., no regressions.". Al
On 07/08/2011 05:51 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
+ /* first write DF_REF_BASE */
This is not necessary. These uses are written to use_vec, while the
uses from REG_EQUIV and REG_EQUAL are written to eq_use_vec (see
df_ref_create_structure).
Also, anyway this wouldn't work because
df-scan.c has this code to deal with group sets:
/* It is legal to have a set destination be a parallel. */
if (GET_CODE (dst) == PARALLEL)
{
int i;
for (i = XVECLEN (dst, 0) - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
rtx temp = XVECEXP (dst, 0, i);
if (GET_CODE (temp) =
On 07.07.2011 20:18, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 07/01/2011 10:50 AM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
On 26.05.2011 17:32, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
On 25.05.2011 19:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 05/25/2011 03:29 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
I think the hook is a better idea than the attribute becaus
On 07/07/11 21:08, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw writes:
>> On 07/07/11 15:34, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> It seems a shame to have both (return) and (simple_return). You said
>>> that we need the distinction in order to cope with targets like ARM,
>>> whose (return) instruction ac
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in order to better analyze what SRA is or is not doing, it is
> sometimes advantageous to have in the dump information that a
> structure was not subject to total scalarization because it was too
> big - if we have detailed dumping on, that is.
>
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First there are two cleanup patches independent of the fix:
>
> Start counting nesting level from 0.
> Do not compute twice type, lb, and ub.
>
> Then the patch that fixes PR47654:
>
> Fix PR47654: Compute LB and UB of a CLAST expression
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 07/05/11 21:25, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> A C bootstrap only should be fine of course, since the code isn't
>> going to be run.)
>>
>>> + hwloop_info loops = NULL;
>>
>> Unnecessary initialisation (or at least, it should be).
>
> ? The value is used inside the loop
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
> * First it uses HARD_REG_SETs for defs_generated and
> regs_invalidated_by_call, instead of bitmaps. Replacing in total more than
> 400K calls (for my testcase)
This XFAILs the loop interchange testcases that are now confused
by better PRE.
Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2011-07-08 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/49662
* gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-14.c: XFAIL.
* gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-15.c:
Hello,
This patch simply removes legacy call_expr_arg and call_expr_argp
declarations since these functions no longer have a defined body. Use
CALL_EXPR_ARG and CALL_EXPR_ARGP macros instead.
Build fine and no regression on x86_64.
2011-07-08 Romain Geissler
* tree.h: Remove call_expr
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Romain Geissler
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch simply removes legacy call_expr_arg and call_expr_argp
> declarations since these functions no longer have a defined body. Use
> CALL_EXPR_ARG and CALL_EXPR_ARGP macros instead.
>
> Build fine and no regression on x86_
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 06:20:04AM +0300, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
* First it uses HARD_REG_SETs for defs_generated and
regs_invalidated_by_call, instead of bitmaps. Replacing in total
more than
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch - first of series - adds to fold and some helper routines support
> for one-bit precision bitwise folding and detection.
> This patch is necessary for - next patch of series - boolification of
> comparisons.
>
> Bootstrapped
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:03 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Here is the updated patch. I will wait for Uros's comments.
>>
>
> I attached the wrong file. Here is the updated patch.
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/abi/bitfield3.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/abi/bitfield3.C
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
// Cygwin and mingw3
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch - second of series - adds boolification of comparisions in
> gimplifier. For this
> casts from/to boolean are marked as not-useless. And in fold_unary_loc
> casts to non-boolean integral types are preserved.
> The hunk in tr
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patch - first of series - adds to fold and some helper routines support
>> for one-bit precision bitwise folding and detection.
>> This patch is necessary for - next patch of series - boolification
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011, Tom G. Christensen wrote:
> Latest results for 4.4.x.
Thanks, Tom.
Gerald
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch - third of series - fixes vrp to handle bitwise one-bit
> precision typed operations.
> And it introduces a second - limitted to non-switch-statement range - vrp
> pass.
Err - please split this patch. I agree with Paolo, t
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
>> On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>>
>>> + /* We redo folding here one time for allowing to inspect more
>>> + complex reductions. */
>>> + substitute_and_fold (op_with_constant_singleton_value_range,
>>>
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Kai Tietz wrote
> 2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This patch - first of series - adds to fold and some helper routines support
>>> for one-bit precision bitwise folding and detection.
>>> This patc
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> Looks fine to me, but please allow 24 hours for the web maintainers to
> comment if they wish.
Thanks, this looks good.
Gerald
CCed Eric and Bernd.
Denis Chertykov wrote:
>> Did you decide about the fix for PR46779?
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00810.html
>>
>> Is it ok to commit?
>
> I forgot about testsuite regressions for this patch.
>
> Denis.
There were no new regressions:
http://gcc.gnu.o
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
Hello list,
The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
* First it uses HARD_REG_SETs for defs_generated and
regs_invalidated_by_call, instead of bitmaps. Replacing in total mo
2011/7/8 Georg-Johann Lay :
> CCed Eric and Bernd.
>
> Denis Chertykov wrote:
>>> Did you decide about the fix for PR46779?
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00810.html
>>>
>>> Is it ok to commit?
>>
>> I forgot about testsuite regressions for this patch.
>>
>> Denis.
>
>
> There
As described in the PR, unless the assembler supports -relax, SPARC gcc
can emit sethi+jmp instead of just call, so the pattern has to be more
specific.
This patch implements this, also having to account for the fact that
subexpressions in Tcl regexps double the match count.
Tested with the appro
Eric, Jakub,
Thanks for your inputs, I've applied them. Updated patch is attached.
So, one more time:
ChangeLog entry:
2011-07-06 Kirill Yukhin
PR middle-end/49519
* calls.c (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Additional
check if address is stored in register. If s
The next patch in the line of toplevel libgcc moves proved to be
completely trivial: fixed-bit.[ch] is moved over with corresponding
include and Makefile changes.
Tested with a C-only --enable-fixed-point non-bootstrap build/test on
mips-sgi-irix6.5. Without --enable-fixed-point, fixed-point supp
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > + tree rhs1 = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt);
> > + gimple def_stmt = SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (rhs1);
> > + value_range_t *final, *inner;
> > +
> > + /* Obtain final and inner value-ranges for a con
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> df-scan.c has this code to deal with group sets:
>
>/* It is legal to have a set destination be a parallel. */
>if (GET_CODE (dst) == PARALLEL)
> {
>int i;
>
>for (i = XVECLEN (dst, 0) - 1; i >= 0; i--)
> {
>rtx temp = XVECE
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
>>> On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
+ /* We redo folding here one time for allowing to inspect more
+ complex reductions. */
+ substitute_and_fold (op_with
On 07/08/2011 12:33 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
The next patch in the line of toplevel libgcc moves proved to be
completely trivial: fixed-bit.[ch] is moved over with corresponding
include and Makefile changes.
Tested with a C-only --enable-fixed-point non-bootstrap build/test on
mips-sgi-irix6.5. W
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
>>> On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
+ /* We redo folding here one time for allowing to inspect more
+ complex reductions. */
+ substitute_and_fold (op_with
> So, one more time:
You didn't really need to re-submit but...
> ChangeLog entry:
> 2011-07-06 Kirill Yukhin
>
> PR middle-end/49519
> * calls.c (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Additional
> check if address is stored in register. If so - give up.
> (che
Hi Doug,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Douglas Rupp wrote:
> An update to the IA-32/x86-64 section seems the right place. I confess
> to being ignorant about how to update this html page. Please advise.
at http://gcc.gnu.org/cvs.html I tried to summarize things a bit.
If you have any questions, don't hes
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Patch is okay if you take care of committing both, but please wait 48 hours
> or so, and please post the updated patch with config/dfp-bit.c moved to
> dfp-bit.c (config/t-dfprules should stay there).
Here's the revised version. Bootstrapped without regressions on
x86_64
And another easy one: moving libgcov over to libgcc.
Bootstrapped without regressions on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Ok for mainline?
After this one, and once the problems with the unwinder move are sorted
out, I've got a few more:
* gthr is just in the planning stage
* f
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patch - second of series - adds boolification of comparisions in
>> gimplifier. For this
>> casts from/to boolean are marked as not-useless. And in fold_unary_loc
>> casts to non-boolean integral t
On 07/08/2011 01:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
And another easy one: moving libgcov over to libgcc.
Bootstrapped without regressions on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Ok for mainline?
After this one, and once the problems with the unwinder move are sorted
out, I've got a few mor
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This patch - second of series - adds boolification of comparisions in
>>> gimplifier. For this
>>> casts from/to boolean are marked as not-useless
Denis Chertykov wrote:
> 2011/7/8 Georg-Johann Lay :
>> CCed Eric and Bernd.
>>
>> Denis Chertykov wrote:
Did you decide about the fix for PR46779?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00810.html
Is it ok to commit?
>>> I forgot about testsuite regressions for this
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> Rainer Orth writes:
>
>> All bootstraps have completed without regressions, so I've installed the
>> patch as is, after verifying that the libgo parts aren't present in the
>> upstream Go repo.
>
> I committed the libgo patch to the upstream repository.
I completely m
Hi,
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> It should be indeed safe with the current handling of conversions, but
> better be safe. So, like the following?
No. The point is that you can't compare the bounds that VRP computes with
each other when the outcome affects correctness. Think
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, IMNSHO the rs6000 vector_select_* patterns
are invalid RTL, they compare a vector register in some vector mode
to const0_rtx instead of corresponding vector zero constant.
The "Comparison Operations" section of RTL docs says:
"The mode of the comparison is determined b
On 07/07/11 13:37, Richard Guenther wrote:
I'll cook up a quick patch for VRP.
Like the attached. I'll finish and properly test it.
Your patch appears to do the wrong thing for this test case:
int
foo (int a, short b, short c)
{
int bc = b * c;
return a + (short)bc;
}
With your patch,
Currently the gcc.dg/20020312-2.c testcase fails on darwin11 with...
FAIL: gcc.dg/20020312-2.c (test for excess errors)
at -m32 due to the fact that the absolute addressing (-mdynamic-no-pic) is not
allowed with the
default -pie linkage of darwin11 and later which produces a warning. The
att
On 07/08/2011 12:43 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
The docs also say that the first expr_list can be null:
If @var{lval} is a @code{parallel}, it is used to represent the case of
a function returning a structure in multiple registers. Each element
of the @code{parallel} is an @code{expr_
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 07/08/2011 12:43 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
The docs also say that the first expr_list can be null:
If @var{lval} is a @code{parallel}, it is used to represent the case of
a function returning a structure in multiple registers. Each element
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> So, one more time:
>
> You didn't really need to re-submit but...
>
>> ChangeLog entry:
>> 2011-07-06 Kirill Yukhin
>>
>> PR middle-end/49519
>> * calls.c (mem_overlaps_already_clobbered_arg_p): Additional
>> check
Currently, gcc.dg/darwin-segaddr.c fails its execution test at both -m32
and -m64 on darwin11. This is due to the default -pie linkage on darwin11
allowing
ASLR to randomize the segaddr on each individual execution of the resulting
binary. The
attached patch eliminates this failure by passing
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=176041
Committed this patchlet as pre-approved by Denis.
Johann
* config/avr/avr.c (output_reload_insisf): Use 'REG_Z+1' instead
of magic '31'.
--- trunk/gcc/config/avr/avr.c 2011/07/08 13:03:38 176040
+++ trunk/gcc/config/
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 07/07/11 13:37, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
>>> I'll cook up a quick patch for VRP.
>>
>> Like the attached. I'll finish and properly test it.
>
> Your patch appears to do the wrong thing for this test case:
>
> int
> foo (int a, short b,
On 07/08/2011 03:05 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
>
> Paolo, something else, in df_mark_reg() is it ever possible for regno to
> be >= FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER? An assert I've put doesn't trigger for my
> simple test :-)
>From reading the docs of EH_RETURN_STACKADJ_RTX and EH_RETURN_HANDLER_RTX,
Hello,
This patch factors out the label truth_andor in fold_binary_loc into a
separate function.
2011-07-08 Kai Tietz
* fold-const.c (fold_truth_andor): Factored out truth_andor
label from fold_binary as function.
(fold_binary_loc): Replace truth_andor lable
by
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > It should be indeed safe with the current handling of conversions, but
> > better be safe. So, like the following?
>
> No. The point is that you can't compare the bounds that VRP computes with
Thanks Paolo for the detailed explanation!
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
That said, changing exit_block_uses and entry_block_defs to HARD_REG_SET would
be a nice cleanup, but it would also touch target code due to
targetm.extra_live_on_entry (entry_block_defs);
I've already done
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> Thanks, here is what I've committed after bootstrapping/regtesting
>> again on x86_64-linux and i686-linux.
> Thanks Jakub. Probably worth an entry in changes.html.
Yes, please. :-)
Gerald
On 07/07/11 22:08, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Sure, I understand that returns does more than return on ARM.
> What I meant was: we'd normally want that other stuff to be
> expressed in rtl alongside the (return) rtx. E.g. something like:
>
> (parallel
> [(return)
> (set (reg r4) (mem (
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 17:30 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> > I still do not like the implementation of yet another CSE machinery
> > given that we already have two.
>
> From reading it it really seems to be a normal block-local CSE, without
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
> alpha-elf: Disable stabs debugging, and the mips sdb extensions.
>
> In particular, the mips sdb extensions accidentally implied the
> irix dwarf2 extensions and restrictions. Disable stabs because
> it's almost certainly unteste
On 07/08/2011 11:05 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 06:20:04AM +0300, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
* First it uses HARD_REG_SETs for defs_generated and
regs_invalidated_by_ca
Now that we have constexpr constructors, having a non-trivial
constructor no longer precludes a variable being TREE_READONLY. The
front end will clear TREE_READONLY if the variable requires non-constant
initialization.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit bd0343de0277ae5d66f6
There are tests in suite that set -fschedule-insns[2] and FAIL because of
warning: instruction scheduling not supported on this target machine
[enabled by default]
As there is no individual switch do disable the warning, the patch
disables some test cases so reduce the overall "noise of false tes
Rainer Orth writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>
>> Rainer Orth writes:
>>
>>> All bootstraps have completed without regressions, so I've installed the
>>> patch as is, after verifying that the libgo parts aren't present in the
>>> upstream Go repo.
>>
>> I committed the libgo patch to the upst
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
> And another easy one: moving libgcov over to libgcc.
Do you have any specific plans regarding gcov-io.c and gcov-io.h? Because
they are genuinely used on both the host and the target they are a
trickier case; I wonder if they should end up in their own
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
>>> On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
+ /* We redo folding here one time for allowing to inspect more
+ complex reductions. */
+ substitute_and_fold (op_with
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 10:22:16AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-rom.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> +// PR c++/49673: check that test_data goes into .rodata
> +// { dg-options -std=c++0x }
> +// { dg-final { scan-assembler "rodata" } }
That will m
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>
> + /* We redo folding here one time for allowing to inspect more
> + co
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
2011/7/7 Paolo Bonzini :
> On 07/07/2011 06:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>
>> + /* We redo folding here one time for all
These tests are too big for AVR: .text (128 KiB) overflows and ld
complains.
Ok to commit?
Johann
* gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-16_main.c: Skip AVR.
* gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-17_main.c: Skip AVR.
* gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-18_main.c: Skip AVR.
* g++.d
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot. (If you have
any questions, send them to .)
A new POT file for textual domain 'cpplib' has been made available
to the language teams for translation. It is archived as:
http://translationproject.org/POT-files/c
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, IMNSHO the rs6000 vector_select_* patterns
> are invalid RTL, they compare a vector register in some vector mode
> to const0_rtx instead of corresponding vector zero constant.
>
> The "Comparison Operations" sec
On 11-07-08 3:25 AM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
On 07.07.2011 20:18, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The changes in sel-sched.c is ok for me. i386.md changes look ok for
me too
but you should ask a x86 maintainer to get an approval for the change.
I think you should describe the attribute in the docu
"Joseph S. Myers" writes:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
>> And another easy one: moving libgcov over to libgcc.
>
> Do you have any specific plans regarding gcov-io.c and gcov-io.h? Because
None so far: the issues outlined in the libgcov submission are currently
the end of what I
Ian,
>>> I committed the libgo patch to the upstream repository.
>>
>> I completely missed that: at least in https://go.googlecode.com/hg/
>> libtool.m4 isn't present.
>
> The immediate upstream project for libgo is
> https://gofrontend.googlecode.com/hg/ . Most of the files in the libgo
> direct
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Index: gcc-head/gcc/tree-vrp.c
>> @@ -2232,6 +2235,7 @@ extract_range_from_binary_expr (value_ra
>> some cases. */
>> if (code != BIT_AND_EXPR
>> && code != TRUTH_AND_EXPR
>> + && code != BIT_IOR_E
Hi, there was only one patch committed to the graphite branch that
matters to also have in trunk:
Remove continue from loop, add one more assert.
The other patches are squashed into the two commits:
Only update ChangeLog.graphite.
these are related to the graphite-opencl infrastructure and
---
gcc/ChangeLog.graphite | 22 ++
1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite b/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
index 628fb7e..b2c1b1c 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
@@ -1,3 +1,25 @@
+2011-05-26 Alexey Kra
---
gcc/ChangeLog.graphite | 27 +++
1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite b/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
index c3fd009..2a14fc4 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog.graphite
@@ -1,3 +1,30 @@
+2011-05-24 Sebas
2011-07-08 Sebastian Pop
* graphite-dependences.c (build_alias_set_powerset): Remove
continue from loop, add one more assert.
---
gcc/ChangeLog |5 +
gcc/ChangeLog.graphite |5 +
gcc/graphite-dependences.c | 15 ++-
3 files changed
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot. (If you have
any questions, send them to .)
A new POT file for textual domain 'gcc' has been made available
to the language teams for translation. It is archived as:
http://translationproject.org/POT-files/gcc-
Hello,
This is the reworked patch, It fixes vrp to handle bitwise one-bit
precision typed operations
and to handle some type hoisting cases, Some cases can't be handled as
long as vrp doesn't
allows to insert new statements in folding pass.
To have in first pass better match, VRP uses for stmt-fol
Hi,
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Kai Tietz wrote:
> This is the reworked patch, It fixes vrp to handle bitwise one-bit
> precision typed operations and to handle some type hoisting cases, Some
> cases can't be handled as long as vrp doesn't allows to insert new
> statements in folding pass. To have in
Some names include "sync" and some don't?
Well, I was going to blame Aldy :-) but then I went to look at this, and
thats the same way *all* the other __sync instructions seem to be.
ie:
builtins.c:expand_builtin_lock_test_and_set (enum machine_mode mode,
tree exp,
builtins.c: case BUILT_IN_L
2011/7/8 Michael Matz :
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Kai Tietz wrote:
>
>> This is the reworked patch, It fixes vrp to handle bitwise one-bit
>> precision typed operations and to handle some type hoisting cases, Some
>> cases can't be handled as long as vrp doesn't allows to insert new
>> statemen
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:03:07PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> patch is long, so let me review it in more passes.
Fair enough.
> >
> >
> > 2011-06-22 Martin Jambor
> >
> > * ipa-prop.h: Include alloc-pool.h.
> > (ipa_lattice_type): Removed.
> > (ipcp_value_source): Ne
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As detailed in the PR, improvements to jump threading caused the
relatively simple guard predicates in this testcase to become
significantly more complex. The predicate complexity is enough to
confuse the predicate-aware pruning of bogus uninitialize
On 07/08/2011 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
That will match only on ELF and perhaps a few other targets, but I'm certain
many targets put read-only data elsewhere. I'd just guard this
with a few most common target triplets that are known to use .rodata
section.
Done, thanks. I've also remove
The testcase is kind of bogus, but we ought to be more robust.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
commit f6ac9e35ced48b4e646f1cb0a8b5cab869ad91f6
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri Jul 8 13:05:01 2011 -0400
PR c++/45603
* decl.c (expand_static_init): Don't get confused by us
Steve,
> I just tried builds on ia64 linux and HP-UX and both builds failed. I
> am re-trying the HP-UX build with --with-system-libunwind to see if that
> changes things but that should be the default on IA64 HP-UX.
>
> On Linux (debian) the build stopped with:
>
> /test/big-foot1/gcc/nightly/gc
Steve,
> It looks like the GCC build is trying to compile unwind-ia64.c on IA64
> HP-UX even though it should not use or need this file. Using
> --with-system-libunwind doesn't seem to help. I am not sure where this
> should be handled under the new setup. Previously config.gcc would
> either i
Steve,
> It looks like this is caused by having two '#include "md-unwind-support.h"'
> lines in unwind-ia64.c. If I remove the first one (mixed in with the other
> includes at the top of the file) and leave the second one then the file
> compiles. I still get the warning about discarding the cas
> > > /* Structure holding data required to describe a pass-through jump
> > > function. */
> > >
> > > struct GTY(()) ipa_pass_through_data
> > > {
> > > /* If an operation is to be performed on the original parameter, this
> > > is the
> > > second (constant) operand. */
> > > tree
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> > And another easy one: moving libgcov over to libgcc.
>
> Do you have any specific plans regarding gcov-io.c and gcov-io.h? Because
> they are genuinely used on both the host and the target they are a
> trickier case; I wonder if they should end up
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 Spanish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/es.po
(This file, 'gcc-4.6.1.es.po', has just
2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Kai Tietz wrote
>> 2011/7/8 Richard Guenther :
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
Hello,
This patch - first of series - adds to fold and some helper routines
support
for one-bit precision bi
On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 20:16 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Steve,
>
> > It looks like this is caused by having two '#include "md-unwind-support.h"'
> > lines in unwind-ia64.c. If I remove the first one (mixed in with the other
> > includes at the top of the file) and leave the second one then the fi
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 15:48, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> I have now committed the patch with only the nits fixed (Rev.175966). But
> given that the coarray support - especially with regards to the library - is
> still in a flux, we can still change everything, including the ABI of the
> library and th
Hi!
E.g. on
extern void d (int);
void __attribute__((noinline, noclone))
self (int i)
{
if (i == 200)
self (i + 1);
else
d (i + 2);
}
this patch saves two bytes in the location description of the call site
value where we have a SImode comparison with 200, by
As suggested in c++/49353, this patch stops copying linkage flags to
thunks in function_and_variable_visibility, replacing that with just
asserts to make sure that the front end is setting things up properly.
To make the front end's job easier, I've added
cgraph_add_to_same_comdat_group so tha
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
