On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Ira Rosen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When we can't vectorize a certain statement in SLP we mark it as not
> vectorizable and continue with the analysis. This is wrong when the
> reason for the failure is that we can't analyze a data-ref, because
> this way we may miss a data
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> Jan,
>
> The following patch started as a one-liner for ipa-inline-analysis.c:
> account_size_time() to merge predicates when we are adding data to entry[0]
> (i.e., when space for 32 size_time entries is exhausted):
>
> @@ -537,6 +592,9
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I have a patch for PR43814. It introduces an option that assumes that function
> arguments of pointer type are aligned, and uses that information in
> tree-ssa-ccp. This enables the memcpy in pr43814-2.c to be inlined.
>
> I te
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 11:31:25AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> In the end I'd probably say the patch is ok without the option (thus
> turned on by default), but if LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE is part of the
> glibc ABI then we clearly can't do this.
Yes, LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE is part of glibc ABI. I guess w
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:19:57 -0700
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I committed this patch to mainline to fix the problem. Bootstrapped on
> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
>
> 2011-09-23 Ian Lance Taylor
>
> * md5.c (md5_process_bytes): Correct handling of unaligned
> buffer.
This is *exac
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this patch extends handling of non-SSA arguments to bultin_constant_p and
> execution predicates.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, will commit it shortly.
>
> Honza
>
> * ipa-inline-analysis.c (set_cond_stmt_execution_pred
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> Hi,
> ipa-inline-analysis use is_gimple_min_invariant that in turn require
> current_function_decl
> to be set to the corresponding function or all addresses of automatic vars
> are considered
> non-invariant.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested x8
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Jiangning Liu wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> OK. I will wait 24 more hours. If no objections by then, I will get it
> checked into trunk.
I don't think you need -funroll-loops though.
> Thanks,
> -Jiangning
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikes
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 11:31:25AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> In the end I'd probably say the patch is ok without the option (thus
>> turned on by default), but if LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE is part of the
>> glibc ABI then we clearly can't do
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> >
>> > I suppose you want a torture that excercises different -march/-mtune
>> > combinations then.
>> >
>> > But can't you do the pruning somewhere in an .exp file then instead
>> > of sprinkling it all over the tests itself?
>> >
>
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This simple patch improves the f3 function in the testcase below,
> a parameter with TYPE_RESTRICT REFERENCE_TYPE IMHO can be safely treated
> like the DECL_BY_REFERENCE case where the source actually didn't contain
> a reference, but
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 01:26:36PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > +int
> > +f3 (S &__restrict x, S &__restrict y)
> > +{
> > + x.p[0] = 3;
> > + y.p[0] = 0;
> > +// { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "return 3" 1 "optimized" } }
> > + return x.p[0];
> > +}
> > +
> > +int
> > +f4 (S &x, S &y)
> Re: [google] Linker plugin to do function reordering...
Is there a particularly good reason for why you guys
slip `[google]' into all of your `Subject:' lines?
I was under the impresions that this list is for work
on GCC. Consider putting something germane in the
brackets instead.
On 11-09-24 09:37 , Michael Witten wrote:
Re: [google] Linker plugin to do function reordering...
Is there a particularly good reason for why you guys
slip `[google]' into all of your `Subject:' lines?
Yes, labels in brackets tend to be markers for branches, version
numbers, specific modules
Jan,
This patch causes a bootstrap failure on AIX because some symbols no
longer are exported by libstdc++. When I remove your patch, bootstrap
proceeds past this failure.
David
exec(): 0509-036 Cannot load program exec(): 0509-036 Cannot load
program /tmp/20110923/./gcc/cc1plus/tmp/20110923/./
> This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
> updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
>
> Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
>
> Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks,
> - Tom
>
> 2011-07-30 Tom de Vries
>
> PR middle-end/43513
> * Makefil
Hi,
this is a couple of small tweaks to the GIMPLE optimizers aimed at helping
vectorization in Ada. More changes will be needed, so no testcases yet.
1. pass_fold_builtins knows how to delete a call to __builtin_stack_restore
that is the only real statement in a cleanup, i.e. to turn
:
On 09/24/2011 07:26 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
I don't see why
f4 (s, s)
would be invalid. But you would miscompile it.
+int
+f4 (S&x, S&y)
+{
+ x.p[0] = 4;
+ y.p[0] = 0; // { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "return 4" 0 "optimized" } }
+ return x.p[0];
+}
It looks to me like the t
Hi,
committed mainline and 4_6-branch.
Paolo.
//
2011-09-24 John Salmon
PR libstdc++/50509
* include/bits/random.tcc (seed_seq::generate): Fix computation.
Index: include/bits/random.tcc
===
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> a typo fixed.
Thanks, Kirill. Note you were attaching the patch as
Application/OCTET-STREAM which does not generally view nicely for
others; perhaps just include the patch in the body of the mail to
avoid that?
Index: htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html
=
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:19:57 -0700
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> I committed this patch to mainline to fix the problem. Bootstrapped on
>> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
>>
>> 2011-09-23 Ian Lance Taylor
>>
>> * md5.c (md5_process_bytes): Correct handling of
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:00:37 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 11-09-24 09:37 , Michael Witten wrote:
>>> Re: [google] Linker plugin to do function reordering...
>>
>> Is there a particularly good reason for why you guys
>> slip `[google]' into all of your `Subject:' lines?
>
> Yes, labels in brack
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
These are OK (with ChangeLog entries properly omitting the "include/",
since they go in include/ChangeLog) in the absence of libiberty maintainer
objections within 72 hours.
Thanks. Is someone willing to commit them now they have been accepted? I
am
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote:
> Hans, here is what I'm playing with right now against current
> trunk.
A spot-check review:
> I looked at the use cases for making use of the scale factor in the
> VIS %gsr register and it's used similar to how rounding modes are
> modified in the FPU co
I think you may be trolling, but I'll give you the benefit of the
doubt since you seem to be lacking some background.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 15:19, Michael Witten wrote:
> Why is gnu.gcc.org hosting work that is specific to some company's
> build system?
We've long allowed different companies
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:15:06 -0400 (EDT)
> It's more of a parameter actually, GSR.scale_factor is the
> bit-shift count for the pack insns and GSR.alignaddr_offset the
> byte-shift in the aligndata insns.
I realize this.
> I'd prefer it as a parameter to the builtins
On Sep 24, 2011, at 12:19 PM, Michael Witten wrote:
> Why is gnu.gcc.org hosting work that is specific to some company's
> build system?
This list isn't for this topic. If you want, please, really, go play in
gnu.misc.discuss. This list is for technical patches and the technical review
of such
Hi,
committed to mainline and 4_6-branch.
Paolo.
///
2011-09-24 John Salmon
PR libstdc++/50510
* include/bits/random.tcc (seed_seq::generate): Fix computation.
Index: include/bits/random.tcc
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote:
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:15:06 -0400 (EDT)
> > I'd prefer it as a parameter to the builtins (expanding to two
> > insns, letting gcc get rid of the redundant ones; let the
> > initialization value be 0). I understand you're tr
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:37:33 -0400 (EDT)
> BTW, don't forget to clobber GSR at call insns!
This I explicitly want to avoid and is an explicit design decision.
Like I said the model is like setting the floating point rounding mode
for a family of functions.
You set t
On 09/24/2011 05:29 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> This is an updated version of the patch. I have 2 new patches and an
>> updated testcase which I will sent out individually.
>>
>> Patch set was bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
>>
>> Ok for trunk?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Tom
>>
>> 2011-07-30 Tom de
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011, David Miller wrote:
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:37:33 -0400 (EDT)
>
> > BTW, don't forget to clobber GSR at call insns!
>
> This I explicitly want to avoid and is an explicit design decision.
Aha, now I get it; that's certainly key. Thanks for tak
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 19:32:55 -0400 (EDT)
> PS. gcc-4.7/changes.html?
Also on my TODO list, and Eric made some noise about documenting these
improvements as well, thanks for the reminder.
I'll post and commit the current version of my %gsr changes after my
bootstrap/t
This patch implements C++11 non-static data member initializers (NSDMI),
as proposed in
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2008/n2756.htm and
specified by the C++11 standard.
For ease of reading, the changes are broken into four patches:
1) Implementation of non-static data me
As discussed over the past few days. Committed to trunk.
Hans, thanks again for all of your feedback. I'll also work
on adding more VIS test cases.
gcc/
* config/sparc/sparc.h (FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER): Bump to 103.
(SPARC_GSR_REG): Define.
(FIXED_REGISTERS): Mark GSR as
From: David Miller
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:05:19 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 19:32:55 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> PS. gcc-4.7/changes.html?
>
> Also on my TODO list, and Eric made some noise about documenting these
> improvements as well, thanks for the reminder.
I
From: David Miller
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 02:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> I'll look into your other suggestion in PR48974, namely making use of
> fone VIS instructions.
Hans, just FYI, here is a patch I am regression testing which
implements this.
diff --git a/gcc/config/sparc/constraints.md b/gcc/confi
37 matches
Mail list logo
