On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
>> Did you test Ada and enable the C++ memory model? ;)
>
> See my earlier comment on Ada. Who would ever use the C++ memory model on
> Ada?
People interoperating Ada with C++. Our bug triager Zdenek who
figures out the --param?
>> Btw,
> >> Did you test Ada and enable the C++ memory model? ;)
> >
> > See my earlier comment on Ada. Who would ever use the C++ memory model on
> > Ada?
>
> People interoperating Ada with C++. Our bug triager Zdenek who
> figures out the --param?
Right, that's one example. There are also actually s
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory.
>> Reason: KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE at address: 0x
>> 0x001c4fa0 in lib__writ__write_ali ()
>> (gdb) bt
>> #0 0x001c4fa0 in lib__writ__write_ali ()
>> #1 0x0036799a i
Hello Jakub,
>
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:32:51PM +0800, Terry Guo wrote:
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_y_tst.o compile
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_x_tst.o-
> c_compat_y_tst.o
> > link
> My bootstrap compiler is GCC 4.3.4, the error occurs in stage3 (well, when
> building the RTS). It will take some time to check the revs you quoted.
OK. Still trying to reproduce here and trying to figure out blindly what could
be the cause of this behavior for now.
Olivier is also trying to r
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 03:09:34PM +0800, Terry Guo wrote:
> What you said is for compat/struct-layout-1.exp. What I said is for
> compat/compat.exp. The case contains three files struct-layout-1_x.c,
> struct-layout-1_y.c and struct-layout-1_main.c. All of them are independent
> files and not gene
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 24/08/2011 02:20:50 PM:
>
> This avoids the file/location clutter in front of each line
> in the vectorizer dump. While this is useful for people
> requesting -fvectorizer-verbose=N in dump files this makes
> you unable to compare dumps for testcases on a b
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>
> gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 24/08/2011 02:20:50 PM:
> >
> > This avoids the file/location clutter in front of each line
> > in the vectorizer dump. While this is useful for people
> > requesting -fvectorizer-verbose=N in dump files this make
Hello Jakub,
> The files are there to test the infrastructure. I'd say just try
> 2011-09-01 Jakub Jelinek
>
> * gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_test.h: Decrease bitfield size
> to work even with -fshort-enums.
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_test.h2008-
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 08/31/11 20:43, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Bernd Schmidt writes:
>>> This is necessary when adding shrink-wrapping; otherwise dwarf2cfi sees
>>> inconsistent information and aborts.
>>>
>>> Tested on mips64-elf together with the rest of the shrink-wrapping
>>> patches.
Richard Guenther wrote on 01/09/2011 10:33:23 AM:
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Ira Rosen wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 24/08/2011 02:20:50 PM:
> > >
> > > This avoids the file/location clutter in front of each line
> > > in the vectorizer dump. While this is useful for p
> OK. Still trying to reproduce here and trying to figure out blindly what
> could be the cause of this behavior for now.
I could finally reproduce on another machine (i686-linux), so I am now
doing a binary search to find out precisely what change caused this
failure, so no need for other people
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>>> Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory.
>>> Reason: KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE at address: 0x
>>> 0x001c4fa0 in lib__writ__write_ali ()
>>> (gdb) bt
>
Ira Rosen writes:
>> How about, as Micha suggested, print the location of the loop
>> we currently investigate from vectorize_loops () where we
>> call find_loop_location () instead?
>
> The problem is that a dump of a single loop can be pretty long, and "start
> to analyze loop..."/"finish to ana
Hi,
When vectorizing a function call we replace the original call with a
dummy statement to ensure that DCE later removes it. We also remove
its stmt_vec_info, which causes the segfault when we try to access it
through related pattern stmt. The following patch updates related
pattern stmt to be th
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>
> Richard Guenther wrote on 01/09/2011 10:33:23 AM:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Ira Rosen wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 24/08/2011 02:20:50 PM:
> > > >
> > > > This avoids the file/location clutter in front of each li
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ira Rosen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When vectorizing a function call we replace the original call with a
> dummy statement to ensure that DCE later removes it. We also remove
> its stmt_vec_info, which causes the segfault when we try to access it
> through related pattern s
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:14:29AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ira Rosen wrote:
> > When vectorizing a function call we replace the original call with a
> > dummy statement to ensure that DCE later removes it. We also remove
> > its stmt_vec_info, which causes
On 1 September 2011 11:16, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:14:29AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ira Rosen wrote:
>> > When vectorizing a function call we replace the original call with a
>> > dummy statement to ensure that DCE later removes
Richard Guenther wrote on 01/09/2011 11:13:29 AM:
> > > > IMO it's a bad idea. It's now impossible to find anything when
> > compiling a
> > > > big file. How about only removing the file name?
> > >
> > > How about, as Micha suggested, print the location of the loop
> > > we currently investig
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Hello Richard,
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
>> The fact that you have to adjust gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr38533.c looks problematic
>> to me. Can you investigate the problem report, look at the geneated
>> code with the atom default of the param and
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>
> Richard Guenther wrote on 01/09/2011 11:13:29 AM:
>
> > > > > IMO it's a bad idea. It's now impossible to find anything when
> > > compiling a
> > > > > big file. How about only removing the file name?
> > > >
> > > > How about, as Micha suggested, pr
After doing a binary search, the first revision which breaks bootstrap on
my environment with Ada enabled is the following:
r178353 | vries | 2011-08-31 09:04:25 +0200 (Wed, 31 Aug 2011) | 8 lines
2011-08-31 Tom de Vries
PR middle-end/43513
* Makefile.in (tree-ssa-ccp.o): Add
> After doing a binary search, the first revision which breaks bootstrap on
> my environment with Ada enabled is the following:
>
> r178353 | vries | 2011-08-31 09:04:25 +0200 (Wed, 31 Aug 2011) | 8 lines
> ...
This is probably related to pr50251 also caused by r178353.
Dominique
> > After doing a binary search, the first revision which breaks bootstrap on
> > my environment with Ada enabled is the following:
> >
> > r178353 | vries | 2011-08-31 09:04:25 +0200 (Wed, 31 Aug 2011) | 8 lines
> > ...
>
> This is probably related to pr50251 also caused by r178353.
Thanks. So
>
> this seems to not allow cycles_best to drop with lower width, but
> that it can't should be an implementation detail of get_required_cycles.
> To make it not so, can you add a comment before the loop, like
>
> /* get_required_cycles is monotonically increasing with lower width
> so we can
Ada 2012 added queue containers to the standard library; see AI05-0159 for
details.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Matthew Heaney
* Makefile.rtl, impunit.adb: Add a-csquin.ads, a-cusyqu.ad[sb],
a-cuprqu.ad[sb], a-cbsyqu.ad[sb], a-cbprqu.ad[sb]
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> After doing a binary search, the first revision which breaks bootstrap on
> my environment with Ada enabled is the following:
>
> r178353 | vries | 2011-08-31 09:04:25 +0200 (Wed, 31 Aug 2011) | 8 lines
>
> 2011-08-31 Tom de Vries
>
>
This patch adds the support for the CPU aspect to control the allocation of
tasks to processors.
The following test case should compile quietly in Ada 2012 mode, and execute
without any message (task T should execute on the first processor):
pragma Ada_2012;
procedure Test_CPU_Aspect is
task
This patch is the first step for implementation of aliased parameters
in Ada 2012 mode. It recognizes the keyword aliased on parameters and
ensures that they are passed by reference. The following program
prints out the value 5.
1. pragma Ada_2012;
2. with Text_IO; use Text_IO;
3. p
This patch modifies the expansion of Expression_With_Actions in order to handle
the finalization of a function call nested deep within the condition of an if
statement.
-- Source --
-- main.adb
with Ada.Finalization; use Ada.Finalization;
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada
This patch adds code to handle the finalization of a controlled transient
variable used as an actual of a subprogram call when the call raises an
exception.
-- Source --
-- main.adb:
with Ada.Finalization; use Ada.Finalization;
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
This next step in implementing Ada 2012 AI 142 adds the check that
the actual for an aliased parameter is itself aliased, as shown by
the following example:
1. pragma Ada_2012;
2. with Text_IO; use Text_IO;
3. procedure AliasP3 is
4.G : Integer;
5.
6.procedure
When gnatmake is invoked on a project file where there are unit names
with non ASCII characters that have a specific naming scheme, the
the compiler is unable to find the correct source file names.
This patch corrects this.
The test is to run gnatmake on a project such as:
project Prj is
for Ma
Richard Guenther wrote on 01/09/2011 12:26:25 PM:
> > > Well, it seems to be different what everybody else does and it's
> > > highly redundant for a whole bunch of lines.
> > >
> > > But, it solves my diff issue and the overly long lines as well.
> > >
> > > Your patch changes both dump-file a
This patch enables the frontend support for calling C++ constructors
of non-tagged types. This is required since the equivalent Ada type
of a C++ class that has no virtual methods is a non-tagged limited
record type. After this patch the following test executes well.
class demo
{
int value;
publ
The verification back-end may need to work in a mode in which not all ALI files
are available. Update Read_Withed_ALIs to work in that mode. This does not
impact the compiler.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Yannick Moy
* ali-util.adb, ali-util.ads (Read_W
In Alfa mode, complete information is required so that back-end can retrieve
Alfa information from suitable ALI files.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Yannick Moy
* lib-writ.adb (Write_With_Lines): Always output complete information
on "with" line
On 09/01/2011 12:33 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> After doing a binary search, the first revision which breaks bootstrap on
>> my environment with Ada enabled is the following:
>>
>> r178353 | vries | 2011-08-31 09:04:25 +0200 (Wed, 31 Aug
If a subprogram stub has not previous spec, it defines the formals that will
be used in the proper body, and these formals must have the appropriate cross-
references, for source navigation purposes.
The command
gcc -c a.adb
grep Bar a.ali
must yield:
3U14 Bar 3>19 3>33 3|2b11 5l5 5t8
If a subprogram to be inlined has a by-reference parameter, the value of the
actual must be captured in a renaming declaration to avoid an improper copy.
This was done for limited types and tagged types but not for types with by-
reference components.
The following must execute quietly:
with D2;
This patch should fix the bug in pr50193.
The problem is that the arith_shiftsi pattern accepted any arbitrary
constant as the shift amount (via the shift_amount_operand predicate)
where in fact the constant must be in the range 0..32.
This patch fixes the problem by merely checking that the
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> $subject says it all, COND_EXPR to follow. rhs1 will still be
> a "single" tree, namely a is_gimple_condexpr () operand. That's
> not easy to change (without forcing it to a separate statement,
> thus making it a is_gimple_val) because it embeds
Shrink-wrapping tests on ARM had one additional failure, which I could
track down to a stmfd instruction being emitted where an stmhifd was
intended. The following patch fixes the testcase; full tests running
now. Ok?
Bernd
* config/arm/arm.md (push_multi): Emit predicates.
Index: gcc/co
Hi,
the last change in ipa-split generated a new use of a previously unused
PARM_DECL. When one does this one has to call add_referenced_var. Not
doing so can cause segfault when accessing the (not initialized) var
annotation. So, fixed with the patch.
I took the opportunity to remove all e
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:41:15PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the last change in ipa-split generated a new use of a previously unused
> PARM_DECL. When one does this one has to call add_referenced_var. Not
> doing so can cause segfault when accessing the (not initialized) var
>
On 08/26/11 14:57, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> + /* There must be some kind of conflict. Set the unusable for all
>> + overlapping registers. */
>> + min_reg = chain->regno;
>> + if (incoming_nregs < 0)
>> +min_reg += incoming_nregs;
>> + max_reg = chain->regno + chain->nregs;
>> + f
The compiler incorrectly reports an error about "uninitialized unconstrained
allocation" on a call to a limited build-in-place function when the result type
has a partial view with unknown discriminants, the full view is constrained and
the call is the expression of a return for an enclosing build-
This patch fixes an obscure bug where a record aggregate would be incorrectly
flagged as illegal, when the record is inside an instance of a generic, and the
type is private.
No small test case is available.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Bob Duff
* sem_a
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> This patch fixes the problem by merely checking that the constant is positive.
> I've confirmed that values larger than the mode-size are not a problem because
> the compiler optimizes those away earlier, even at -O0.
Do you mean that you have observed f
The following change
2011-05-26 Rainer Orth
PR gcov-profile/48845
causes testsuite failures on C6X. Specifically,
@@ -495,11 +495,16 @@ proc check_profiling_available { test_wh
# These conditions depend on the argument so examine them before
# looking at the cache va
CPU sets are properly handled in linux using the macros defined for this
effect. This way we avoid problems with the endianness of the target if we
try to modify the bit set by hand.
No functional change.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Jose Ruiz
* s-tapr
When using a restricted run time (such as ZFP or Ravenscar), the compiler
failed when there was a renaming of an attribute as subprogram because
it tried to load a package not available. This patch avoids this problem
by checking before trying to load the offending package.
The following must comp
This patch improves compilation speed when compiling packages with huge numbers
of tagged types and interfaces, with complicated inheritance patterns.
No test is available -- the problem only occurred for enormous packages.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-01 Bob Duff
Hi,
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Ira Rosen writes:
> >> How about, as Micha suggested, print the location of the loop
> >> we currently investigate from vectorize_loops () where we
> >> call find_loop_location () instead?
> >
> > The problem is that a dump of a single loop can
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> +/* A for_each_rtx subroutine of record_hard_reg_sets. */
> +static int
> +record_hard_reg_uses_1 (rtx *px, void *data)
> +{
> + rtx x = *px;
> + HARD_REG_SET *pused = (HARD_REG_SET *)data;
> +
> + if (REG_P (x) && REGNO (x) < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER)
> +{
> + in
When a project A with naming exceptions in its package Naming is extended
by a project B with no package Naming, the naming exceptions are
inherited in project B. If there are source files in the source
directories of project B that correspond to the inherited naming
exceptions, these files are sou
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 08/26/11 14:57, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> + /* There must be some kind of conflict. Set the unusable for all
>>> + overlapping registers. */
>>> + min_reg = chain->regno;
>>> + if (incoming_nregs < 0)
>>> +min_reg += incoming_nregs;
>>> + max_reg = chain
My point is, the middle-end infrastructure makes it possible for this
case to appear, and it seems to be easy to handle conservatively.
There isn't a need to wait for users to run into an ICE or an assert we put
there IMHO. If I'd be fluent in Ada I'd write you a testcase, but I ain't.
Ughh,
On Wednesday 24 August 2011 10:58:19 Tobias Burnus wrote:
> On 08/24/2011 12:01 AM, Mikael Morin wrote:
> > this is an attempt to fix my recent breakage for PR50050.
> > I forgot that shape can't always be known, and thus, that for some
> > expressions, the shape field is a NULL pointer.
> >
> > N
Michael Matz writes:
>> Ira Rosen writes:
>> >> How about, as Micha suggested, print the location of the loop
>> >> we currently investigate from vectorize_loops () where we
>> >> call find_loop_location () instead?
>> >
>> > The problem is that a dump of a single loop can be pretty long, and "st
Julian Brown wrote:
> The problem is, if we're using little-endian bit numbering for memory
> locations in big-endian-bytes mode, we need to define an origin from
> which to count "backwards" from. For the current implementation, this
> will now be (I believe) one word beyond the base address of t
[Jason, can you pontificate on tail-padding and the upcoming C++
standard with regards to bitfields?]
so you wasn't convinced about my worries about tail-padding re-use?
To answer your question, I believe we can't touch past the last field
(into the padding) if the subsequent record will be
On 09/01/2011 10:52 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
To answer your question, I believe we can't touch past the last field
(into the padding) if the subsequent record will be packed into the
first's padding.
Right.
struct A {
int a : 17;
};
struct B : public A {
char c;
};
So here, if gets pac
Fixes generation of invalid CONST_VECTORs in the powerpc backend:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01861.html
Pat Haugen confirms that it also works on GNU/Linux (thanks).
Richard
Is there a way of distinguishing this particular variant (possible
tail-packing), or will we have to disallow storing into the record tail
padding altogether? That would seriously suck.
Basically you can only touch the size of the CLASSTYPE_AS_BASE variant.
For many classes this will be the sa
On 09/01/2011 11:10 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Basically you can only touch the size of the CLASSTYPE_AS_BASE variant.
For many classes this will be the same as the size of the class itself.
All this code is in the middle end, so we're language agnostic.
What do we need here, a hook to query th
On 01/09/11 14:21, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
This patch fixes the problem by merely checking that the constant is positive.
I've confirmed that values larger than the mode-size are not a problem because
the compiler optimizes those away earlier, even at -O0
On 01/09/11 16:26, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
OK, fair enough, redundant or not, here's a patch with belt and braces.
OK now?
And again, with the patch
Andrew
2011-09-01 Andrew Stubbs
gcc/
* config/arm/predicates.md (shift_amount_operand): Ensure shift
amount is in the range 1..mode_siz
Hi,
while working on libstdc++/50257 I noticed this recent mistake of mine:
given our current impl of the unordered containers, the move constructor
allocates memory, thus can certainly throw, similarly to deque, for
example. Also, I reordered the operations in the body of the move
constructo
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 04:29:25PM +0100, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 01/09/11 16:26, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> >OK, fair enough, redundant or not, here's a patch with belt and braces.
> >
> >OK now?
>
> And again, with the patch
>
> Andrew
> 2011-09-01 Andrew Stubbs
>
> gcc/
> *
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Fixes generation of invalid CONST_VECTORs in the powerpc backend:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01861.html
>
> Pat Haugen confirms that it also works on GNU/Linux (thanks).
Okay.
Thanks, David
On 01/09/11 16:51, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
IN_RANGE (INTVAL (op), 0, GET_MODE_PRECISION (mode) - 1) ?
Ok, I can make that change.
1) shift by 0 is well defined (though not sure if arm backend
supports it)
Yeah, I suppose I could allow 0, but I don't know why it would be
helpful? I mean, i
I am friendly pinging this patch.
Dodji Seketeli a écrit:
> Hello,
>
> Jason Merrill writes:
>
>> On 08/06/2011 06:57 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> > @@ -4340,6 +4340,8 @@ c_sizeof_or_alignof_type (location_t loc,
>> >value = fold_convert_loc (loc, size_type_node, value);
>> >gcc_assert
On 08/31/11 20:43, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Bernd Schmidt writes:
>> This is necessary when adding shrink-wrapping; otherwise dwarf2cfi sees
>> inconsistent information and aborts.
>>
>> Tested on mips64-elf together with the rest of the shrink-wrapping
>> patches. Ok?
>
> It looks like the cur
Hi,
the patch below is an updated version of an RFC patch I have sent here
some three weeks ago:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg00975.html
However, this is no longer an RFC but a request for approval because I
have amended it to work also on architectures that use function
descript
Ping?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01626.html
-cary
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Cary Coutant wrote:
>> OK, thanks. Dmitry G. also commented that the patch does not work "for
>> `_Z3fooi.1988' or `_Z3fooi.part.9.165493.constprop.775.31805'."
>> Apparently, there can be multi
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 08/31/11 20:43, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Bernd Schmidt writes:
>>> This is necessary when adding shrink-wrapping; otherwise dwarf2cfi sees
>>> inconsistent information and aborts.
>>>
>>> Tested on mips64-elf together with the rest of the shrink-wrapping
>>> patches.
> - Nevertheless, this method of devirtualization cannot automatically
> de-thunkize this-adjusting thunks and newly direct calls to them
> cannot be inlined because the inliner does not have this capability
> now. This is in fact a regression from 4.6, and testcases
> ivinline-7.C and ivi
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Sri, please add a new api to do cpu_indicator initialization on demand
> to be used in IFUNC context. Perhaps also add some debug check to make
> sure no conflicting cpu model is set.
>
> Ok for google branches for now while the discussio
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Gah, my bad, sorry. I'd forgotten mipsisa32-elf is EABI32
> rather than o32. mips-elf with -mips32/-mips16 would test
> what I was after.
Sigh. Obviously not my day. I just remembered that the default
mips-elf simulator won't accept -mips32 instructions, so you nee
On 09/01/11 21:19, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Richard Sandiford writes:
>> Gah, my bad, sorry. I'd forgotten mipsisa32-elf is EABI32
>> rather than o32. mips-elf with -mips32/-mips16 would test
>> what I was after.
>
> Sigh. Obviously not my day. I just remembered that the default
> mips-elf
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 09/01/11 21:19, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Richard Sandiford writes:
>>> Gah, my bad, sorry. I'd forgotten mipsisa32-elf is EABI32
>>> rather than o32. mips-elf with -mips32/-mips16 would test
>>> what I was after.
>>
>> Sigh. Obviously not my day. I just remember
Hi all,
here is a small patch fixing a recent OOP regression. It feels a bit
like it's only fixing the effect instead of the cause (since I haven't
really found the cause). But anyway, it does fix the ICE and it is
obvious enough so that I'll commit it by Sunday if no one protests in
the meantime.
2011-09-01 Gary Funck
* opts.c (print_specific_help): Fix off-by-one compare in
assertion check.
* opts.h (CL_PARAMS, CL_WARNING, CL_OPTIMIZATION, CL_DRIVER,
CL_TARGET, CL_COMMON, CL_JOINED, CL_SEPARATE, CL_UNDOCUMENTED):
Increase by +5 to allow for more
Before this patch, the mutex attribute was used (by Initialize_TCB from
the environment task) before it was initialized later by Initialize. This
patch creates and initializes mutex and condition variable attributes locally
when needed to avoid this problem.
The following test case should compile
In Alfa mode, protected subprogram calls are not expanded, so that unresolved
calls must be allowed in a place where they should not be allowed in normal
mode.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on trunk
2011-09-02 Yannick Moy
* exp_ch6.adb (Is_Build_In_Place_Function_Call): in
Iterator of the form "of" generate renamings for the container elements. If
the container that is the domain of iteration is a subcomponent of a larger
object, and an assignment is performed on the element, the larger object must
be marked as modified as well.
The following must compile quietly:
88 matches
Mail list logo
