On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 04:32:58PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Not pretty at all. But given the corresponding irritation in writing
> assembler
> wrapper functions, it seems like it's about a wash.
>
> Tested with and without HAVE_AS_AVX on x86_64-linux.
Shouldn't -mavx be also not passed
> From: Anatoly Sokolov
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 22:42:53 +0100
> This patch removes obsolete FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P macro from CRIS back end
> in the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P target
> hook.
>
> Regression tested on cris-axis-elf.
>
> OK to install?
Pl
Fabien Chêne a écrit:
> Index: gcc/dbxout.c
> ===
> --- gcc/dbxout.c (revision 178088)
> +++ gcc/dbxout.c (working copy)
> @@ -1518,6 +1518,8 @@ dbxout_type_fields (tree type)
>if (TREE_CODE (tem) == TYPE_DECL
>
On Wed, 9 Nov 2011, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 9, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > This puts "flag_next_runtime" into the global options structure
>
> > I needed to deal with '-fobjc-sjlj-exceptions' and elected to remove it -
> > - this is because there is only one valid exception mod
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/07/11 15:36, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes. tree-affine does this for a sum of expressions of the form a
>> + b * c. It collects such sum, optimizes it (and you can
>> add/subtract or
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/11/9 Jeff Law :
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 11/07/11 15:36, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes. tree-affine does this for a sum of expressions of the form a
>>> + b * c. It collects such sum, optimizes i
Hi,
This patch handles CALL_EXPRs in constant/invariant operand creation in SLP.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-suse-linux.
Committed.
Ira
ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/51058
* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_get_constant_vectors): Handle CALL_EXPR.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
> > From: Alan Modra
> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
>
> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
>
> > * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.
> > (dup_block_and_redirect, active_insn_b
> 2011-11-09 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR target/50911
> * config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_interleave2): If d->vmode is
> V4SImode, !TARGET_SSE2 and punpck[lh]* is needed, change dremap.vmode
> to V4SFmode.
Thanks for fixing this. I've installed the Ada testcase.
2011-11-
2011/11/10 Richard Guenther :
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/11/9 Jeff Law :
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 11/07/11 15:36, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
Yes. tree-affine does this for a sum of expressions of the form a
+
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
wrote:
>> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
>> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
>
>> > From: Alan Modra
>> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
>>
>> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>> > * function.c (bb_a
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/11/10 Richard Guenther :
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> 2011/11/9 Jeff Law :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/11 15:36, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> Yes. tree
> From: Richard Guenther
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:22:56 +0100
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> wrote:
> >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> >> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
> >
> >> > From: Alan Modra
> >> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
> >>
> >> > On Tue, N
When using gimple_has_side_effects on a GIMPLE_LABEL with a
LABEL_DECL with DECL_FORCED_LABEL set we ICE. That is because
gimple_has_side_effects uses TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS on the LABEL_DECL
which isn't valid. Fixed by (finally) cleaning up this
predicate, removing all code that can only be executed
This fixes PR51070 where we repace the partition
:
# g_224.0_23 = PHI
D.2957_3 = g_92[g_224.0_23];
g_92[g_224.0_23] = 0;
g_224.1_10 = g_224.0_23 + 1;
if (g_224.1_10 != 0)
goto ;
else
goto ;
:
# g_95_I_lsm.15_29 = PHI
g_95[0] = g_95_I_lsm.15_29;
g_224 = 0;
goto ;
:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
wrote:
>> From: Richard Guenther
>> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:22:56 +0100
>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
>> wrote:
>> >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
>> >> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
>> >
>> >> > From: Alan Mo
On 11/10/11 13:14, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Fair enough. You can count me as "one" then, and I'll defer to Bernd
> to either provide a fix or ack the revert.
I'm trying to track it down.
In 189r.outof_cfglayout, we have
(insn 31 33 35 3 (use (reg/i:SI 0 r0))
../../../../baseline-trunk/libstdc+
Currently when building unwind-dw2.c for powerpc64 I see
In file included from ../../../libgcc/unwind-dw2.c:376:0:
./md-unwind-support.h: In function 'frob_update_context':
./md-unwind-support.h:371:8: warning: passing argument 3 of
'_Unwind_SetGRPtr' makes pointer from integer without a cast [e
On 28/09/11 17:15, Sameera Deshpande wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This patch generates Thumb2 epilogues in RTL form.
>
> The work involves defining new functions, predicates and patterns along with
> few changes in existing code:
> * The load_multiple_operation predicate was found to be too restrictive for
>
Hi Iain,
Late reply from gcc-patches archive.
You can simplify further m-lib-tgt-specific-darwin.adb as the default indexer
options is nothing:
Index: mlib-tgt-specific-darwin.adb
===
--- mlib-tgt-specific-darwin.adb(revisi
> From: Bernd Schmidt
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100
> HP, can you run full tests?
Cross-test to cris-elf in progress.
Thanks!
brgds, H-P
Hi Richard,
thanks for your comments.
--
> + if (GET_CODE (SET_SRC (elt = XVECEXP (op, 0, offset_adj))) == PLUS)
>
> It's generally best not to use assignments within conditionals unless
> there is a strong reason otherwise (that normally implies something like
> being deep within a conditi
On 11/09/11 18:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> So here is hopefully last iteration of that.
>
> Negative constants that trunc_int_for_mode to the same value
> are IMHO just fine too, similarly for ZERO_EXTEND 0x for HImode
> should be fine too. On the other side, if mode is DImode and
> outer mode
> Hello!
>
> > This patch defines -march=bdver1 and -mtune=bdver1 flag for the upcoming
> > AMD Bulldozer processor.
Hi,
it seems that bdver/btver is not mentioned in invoke.texi nor changes.html.
Could you please add documentation?
Honza
This fixes PR51042.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2011-11-10 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/51042
* tree-ssa-pre.c (phi_translate_1): Avoid recursing on
self-referential expressions. Refactor code to avoid dup
> No, it isn't. Expanders call other expanders to do fancy stuff. When
> everything is done, they tag a REG_EQUAL note on the last insn.
> One of the purposes of set_unique_reg_note is lubricate this process:
> the layered expanders can add multiple REG_EQUAL notes. We only want
> the most high-
With your last patches, I get decent test results for libitm on Solaris
11/x86, both with Sun as/ld and gas/Sun ld:
=== libitm tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: libitm.c/clone-1.c execution test
FAIL: libitm.c/memcpy-1.c execution test
FAIL: libitm.c/memset-1.c execution test
W
On Nov 10, 2011, at 1:35 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> flag_exceptions also triggers middle-end behavior - without it no
> statement can possibly throw
Actually, one version of exception handling for objective c++ doesn't require
flag_exceptions... One can indeed @throw without it, they just ca
> Initial aim of the pass was to remove zero extentions redundant due to
> implicit zero extention in x64. But implementation actually uses
> generic approach and seems like a mini-combiner. Pass may combine two
> zero extends or combine zero extend with a constant as a special case
> but in other
> So, what about the patch? I think since we already have zee patch it
> would be great to use it as more general optimization. I tested it on
> EEMBC 2.0 on Atom and it showed 1% performance gain in geomean on 32
> bit which is really good for such simple optimization. For OOO archs
> patch is not
On 11/09/2011 02:15 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
NAND patchup arithmetic was missing the 2 stage AND then NOT operation.
Instead it was falling into the same sequence as every other operation
and
trying to perform a binary operation on a NOT.
I managed to modify and existing testcase to trigger t
On 11/10/2011 08:29 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> PR rtl-optimization/51040
> * optabs.c (expand_atomic_fetch_op): Patchup code for NAND should be AND
> followed by NOT.
> * builtins.c (expand_builtin_atomic_fetch_op): Patchup code for NAND
> should be AND followed by NO
The issue here is no atomic support whatsoever. The standard now
*requires* that atomic_flag be implementable in a lock free manner for
compliance. That means they must resolve to something, and not an
external library call.
In order to support atomic_flag in a lock free manner on a target,
Just for fun, I gave libitm a try on alpha-dec-osf5.1b, too. Here's
what I found:
* config/alpha/sjlj.S needs trivial changes for the non-ELF/non-Linux
platform.
* Initially, all C tests were failing like this:
333619:./simple-1.exe: /sbin/loader: Error: libitm.so.0: symbol
"_ZnamRKSt9nothro
On 11/10/2011 08:35 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> Currently I don't issue any warnings ...
> + /* Otherwise issue the store and a warning. */
> + warning_at (loc, 0,
> + "__atomic_clear used on target with no atomic support");
> + __atomic_clear (&a, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
On 11/10/2011 11:47 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/10/2011 08:35 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Currently I don't issue any warnings ...
What are those then?
And, obviously the cris test should be an effective target test.
Oh, those are gone, I must not have re-svn'd
Justa minute
Andrew
On 11/10/2011 08:42 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> libitm:
> * config/alpha/sjlj.S (_ITM_beginTransaction) [!__ELF__]: Don't use
> .hidden.
> (.note.GNU-stack): Only use if __linux__.
> * alloc_cpp.cc [!HAVE_WEAKDEF] (_ZnaXRKSt9nothrow_t): Dummy function.
> * testsuite
On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/10/2011 11:47 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/10/2011 08:35 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Currently I don't issue any warnings ...
What are those then?
And, obviously the cris test should be an effective target test.
Oh, those are gone, I
On 11-11-08 13:11 , Delesley Hutchins wrote:
This patch fixes a bug wherein the trylock attribute would not work if
it was attached to a virtual method.
Bootstrapped and passed gcc regression testsuite on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Okay for google/gcc-4_6?
-DeLesley
Changelog.google-4_6:
201
On 11/10/2011 08:52 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> libstdc++-v3
> * include/bits/atomic_base.h (atomic_thread_fence): Call built-in.
> (atomic_signal_fence): Call built-in.
> (test_and_set, clear): Call new atomic built-ins.
>
> gcc
> * builtins.c (expand_builtin_a
On 11-11-03 14:20 , Delesley Hutchins wrote:
This patch adds support for array indexing (i.e. operator []) in lock
expressions. The current version of gcc seems to emit these as
expressions involving pointer arithmetic, so we update
get_canonical_lock_expr() to handle such expressions.
Bootstr
On 11/10/2011 12:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 04:32:58PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> Not pretty at all. But given the corresponding irritation in writing
>> assembler
>> wrapper functions, it seems like it's about a wash.
>>
>> Tested with and without HAVE_AS_AVX o
Hi,
the inlining heuristics are nowadays decent. In particular, at -O2 the
compiler does the obvious inlinings:
- If the function body is very small (for some measure of small, see
-finline-small-functions)
- static functions called once (-finline-functions-called-once)
Where GCC may need help
Hi Mike,
just want to state my understanding to allow you to comment if I'm
off
On 10 Nov 2011, at 16:12, Mike Stump wrote:
On Nov 10, 2011, at 1:35 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
flag_exceptions also triggers middle-end behavior - without it no
statement can possibly throw
Actually,
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:54 +0100
> > From: Bernd Schmidt
> > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100
>
> > HP, can you run full tests?
>
> Cross-test to cris-elf in progress.
> Thanks!
Works, no regressions compared to before the breakage (r181187).
Thanks! Ac
Looks like it is fixed already, so there is no need for this patch.
David
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Here is the revised patch. Bootstrap and regression tested on linux/x86-64.
>>
>> Honza, can you comme
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/09/11 14:09, Kai Tietz wrote:
>
> Well, such a comparison-logic-folder helper - like affine-tree for
> add/subtract/scale) - is for sure something good for inner gimple
> passes building up new logic-truth expressions, but such a pass
> doesn
> Why PLUS_EXPR and MULT_EXPR? Pointer arithmetic should use
> POINTER_PLUS_EXPR exclusively. I don't think you should be seeing
> PLUS_EXPRs here. The MULT_EXPR show up in scaling expressions?
MULT_EXPR shows up in array indexing, since the index is multiplied by
the size of the element; gcc c
On 11-11-10 13:05 , Delesley Hutchins wrote:
Why PLUS_EXPR and MULT_EXPR? Pointer arithmetic should use
POINTER_PLUS_EXPR exclusively. I don't think you should be seeing
PLUS_EXPRs here. The MULT_EXPR show up in scaling expressions?
MULT_EXPR shows up in array indexing, since the index is mu
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100
> On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> > Justa minute
> >
> > Andrew
> doh. sorry about that
Test cross to cris-elf in progress for your second take (at
r181254 + Bernd's patch to unbreak the tree for
arm-linux-gnueabi an
On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 13:44 +, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 28/09/11 17:15, Sameera Deshpande wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > This patch generates Thumb2 epilogues in RTL form.
> >
> > The work involves defining new functions, predicates and patterns along with
> > few changes in existing code:
> > *
> But you should not see such an expression in gimple. The array index is
> always a gimple_val.
I'm not sure what you mean. The expression array[i+1] compiles to
the following (courtesy of dump-tree-ssa):
D.2095_4 = (long unsigned int) i_1;
D.2096_5 = D.2095_4 + 1;
D.2097_6 = D.2096_5 * 4;
D
On 11-11-10 13:25 , Delesley Hutchins wrote:
But you should not see such an expression in gimple. The array index is
always a gimple_val.
I'm not sure what you mean. The expression array[i+1] compiles to
the following (courtesy of dump-tree-ssa):
D.2095_4 = (long unsigned int) i_1;
D.2096_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/09/11 15:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/09/2011 06:53 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> My patch totally ignores the other code on the unexecutable path.
>> So we can miss externally visible side effects, if we were to
>> somehow get on the unexecutable p
Hi!
The PR50700 change caused infinite recursion - we shouldn't
call compute_builtin_object_size on SSA_NAMEs more than two times,
otherwise we risk calling it endlessly. But TREE_CODE (pt_var)
in this code is known to be MEM_REF, so always != SSA_NAME.
Fixed thusly, committed as obvious to trun
Hi!
This patch adds folding of the new VEC_PERM_EXPR as well as the older
more specialized permutation exprs. For VEC_PERM_EXPR e.g.
__builtin_shuffle may be used with constant arguments, for the other
one the vectorizer sometimes creates it (though, admittedly, it should
try harder to figure it
I've committed this patch to reorganize the internal data structures of gcov in
preparation for some future features. The main change is that the sources list
becomes an array. This changes references to a source_info object to be an
index into the array, rather than a pointer.
In making thi
Hello!
Attached patch fixes corner case with reload, where reload propagates
constant zero into zero_extended LEA instruction, creating invalid
RTX:
(insn 4 15 52 2 (set (reg/v:SI 59 [ p_60 ])
(const_int 0 [0])) tt.c:24 64 {*movsi_internal}
(nil))
...
(insn 29 28 30 3 (set (reg:DI
Hi!
Running valgrind even on simple testcases shows a bunch of
memory leaks (definitely lost). This patch cures some of them.
There are a few further leaks in the options handling.
The first hunk is when this function already called concat to set
opt_text, and then doesn't write opt_text anywher
Hi!
This patch fixes some compiler memory leaks in SLP.
For vect_free_oprnd_info I've removed the FREE_DEF_STMTS argument
and am freeing the defs always, but set them to NULL when moving the vectors
over elsewhere, because otherwise if vect_create_new_slp_node
or vect_build_slp_tree fails after su
Previously, I split out this exact configure fragment to
config/asmcfi.m4 for use in libitm. This just tidies the
original use in libffi so that we don't have duplicates.
Tested on x86_64-linux and committed.
r~
commit 022a1701c4517308af026c64c707883358b37f26
Author: rth
Date: Thu Nov 10 19:
This is the final part of the implementation of AI05-117, whose aim is to make
it possible to implement efficient lock-free algorithms. We map operations on
atomic types onto the new __builtin_atomic_load and __builtin_atomic_store
primitives of the middle-end.
Tested on i586-suse-linux, appli
On 7 November 2011 21:47, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/07/2011 04:43 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately this doesn't work very well in C++11 mode, as defaulted
>> constructors don't cause warnings when they should do e.g.
>
> Maybe check this in defaulted_late_check?
I tried that (atta
On 11/10/2011 11:09 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> + if (TREE_CODE (arg0) == VECTOR_CST)
> + {
> + for (i = 0, t = TREE_VECTOR_CST_ELTS (arg0);
> +i < nelements && t; i++, t = TREE_CHAIN (t))
> + elements[i] = TREE_VALUE (t);
> + if (t)
> +
On 11/10/2011 12:00 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> VEC_PERM_EXPR is explicitly modulo. Don't fail, mask.
It does occur to me that we could usefully fold a constant selector with
out-of-range elements to a new selector with in-range elements, even if the
other operands are non-constant. This mi
On 11/10/2011 02:48 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+warn_missing_meminits (tree type, tree cons)
+{
+ tree mem_inits = sort_mem_initializers (type, NULL_TREE);
+ while (mem_inits)
+{
+ tree member = TREE_PURPOSE (mem_inits);
+ /* TODO do not warn if brace-or-equal-initializer */
+
On 11/10/2011 03:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/10/2011 02:48 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+warn_missing_meminits (tree type, tree cons)
+{
+ tree mem_inits = sort_mem_initializers (type, NULL_TREE);
+ while (mem_inits)
+ {
+ tree member = TREE_PURPOSE (mem_inits);
+ /* TODO do not warn if brac
Hello!
Predicates, defined with "define_predicate" do not handle CONST_INT
and CONST_DOUBLE operands at all, let alone provide any sort of
special bypass for them. Just remove wrong text to save some poor soul
from tripping this trap in the future.
2011-11-10 Uros Bizjak
* doc/md.texi
Thanks. I reformatted the patch a bit and added a testcase; here's what
I'm checking in.
commit 91eed4ebec24bbb2993c1ca8a5407f4fdeff48ec
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Thu Nov 10 00:11:13 2011 -0500
PR debug/50983
* dwarf2out.c (set_cur_line_info_table): Restore the last is_stmt
v
On 10 Nov 2011, at 17:12, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/10/2011 12:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 04:32:58PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
Not pretty at all. But given the corresponding irritation in
writing assembler
wrapper functions, it seems like it's about a wa
DR 495 changed the order of these rules.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit dc49a72a22b10b39edc054414537bda44ce82546
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Thu Nov 10 14:59:15 2011 -0500
PR c++/51079, DR 495
* call.c (joust): Check the second conversion sequence
before
On 11/10/2011 03:25 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
libtool: link: /GCC/gcc-4-7-trunk-build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-trunk-build/./gcc/
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/include -isystem
/GCC/gcc-
> +# non-PIC targets always get an array-bounds error in
> thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns
> +function.o-warn = -Wno-error
Didn't we find another way to fix this? In any case this is
not present in your changelog.
Otherwise the port is looking ok.
r~
On 10 Nov 2011, at 20:33, Patrick Marlier wrote:
On 11/10/2011 03:25 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
libtool: link: /GCC/gcc-4-7-trunk-build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-trunk-build/./gcc/
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/GCC/gcc-4-7-install/i686-apple-darwin9/lib/ -isystem
/GCC/gcc-4-7-i
> Didn't we find another way to fix this? In any case this is
> not present in your changelog.
Yes, please ignore that. I do "svn diff" and then have to cut out all
the bits that aren't part of the base port itself.
Here the problem was that we were calling use_thunk before we knew what
the right linkage for the function it's thunking to was. Fixed by
deferring synthesis of virtual dtors until EOF.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 566d5469261e63f8359998386b3b7c60ecd5e2ba
Author: Jason
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:06:26 +0100
> > From: Andrew MacLeod
> > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100
> > On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> > > Justa minute
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > doh. sorry about that
>
> Test cross to cris-elf in progress for yo
On 11/10/2011 04:19 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
Test cross to cris-elf in progress for your second take (at
r181254 + Bernd's patch to unbreak the tree
And it works without regressions. Thanks!
brgds, H-P
excellent. Its all checked in too.
Andrew
> What about the other spots where we call gimple_call_fndecl, shouldn't we
> call get_fdecl_from_gimple_stmt instead?
Good point. I've gone through and updated the necessary spots.
New patch with all fixes is attached.
-DeLesley
--
DeLesley Hutchins | Software Engineer | deles...@google.
On 11/10/2011 04:50 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/10/2011 04:19 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
Test cross to cris-elf in progress for your second take (at
r181254 + Bernd's patch to unbreak the tree
And it works without regressions. Thanks!
brgds, H-P
excellent. Its all checked in too.
A
On 11-11-10 17:23 , Delesley Hutchins wrote:
+{
+ tree callee = gimple_call_fn (call);
+ if (TREE_CODE (callee) == OBJ_TYPE_REF)
+{
+ tree objtype = TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT (callee)));
+ /* Check to make sure objtype is a valid type.
+
On 11/10/2011 02:28 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> * doc/extend.texi: Document __atomic_test_and_set and __atomic_clear.
ok.
r~
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> ld -r is now supported with LTO. When using assembler files or non
>>> LTOed objects inside ld -r objects together with LTO then the Linux
>>> binutils 2.21.51.0.3 or later are needed.
>> I think this should be GN
Michael,
This patch (r181172) has broken my bootstrap of IA64 Linux and I am
trying to figure out what to do about it.
The failure happens while building libunwind (I did not configure with
--with-system-libunwind):
/ctires/gcc/nightly/build-ia64-redhat-linux-gnu-trunk/obj_gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/cti
On 10 November 2011 20:17, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/10/2011 03:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>> On 11/10/2011 02:48 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> +warn_missing_meminits (tree type, tree cons)
>>> +{
>>> + tree mem_inits = sort_mem_initializers (type, NULL_TREE);
>>> + while (mem_inits)
>>
On 10 Nov 2011, at 20:43, Iain Sandoe wrote:
The symbol _ITM_malloc is in libitm. Maybe the problem is an extra
_ before the _ITM_malloc?
Actually, I think the missing symbol is
___emutls_v._ZN3GTM12_gtm_thr_tlsE
and (although the m32 lib builds OK - the symbol is also missing
there).
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 02:29:04PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/10/11 13:14, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > Fair enough. You can count me as "one" then, and I'll defer to Bernd
> > to either provide a fix or ack the revert.
>
> I'm trying to track it down.
>
> In 189r.outof_cfglayout, we hav
http://codereview.appspot.com/5303083/diff/28001/gcc/tree-tsan.c
File gcc/tree-tsan.c (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5303083/diff/28001/gcc/tree-tsan.c#newcode227
gcc/tree-tsan.c:227: var = varpool_node_for_asm (id);
Use cgraph_node_for_asm instead.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5303083
Have you run through SPEC, and SPEC06 with this change? What is the
instrumentation overhead using gcc?
David
http://codereview.appspot.com/5303083/
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:29:35PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> On 10 Nov 2011, at 20:43, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> The symbol _ITM_malloc is in libitm. Maybe the problem is an extra _
>>> before the _ITM_malloc?
>>
>> Actually, I think the missing symbol is
>> ___emutls_v._ZN3GTM12_gtm_thr_tlsE
On 11/10/2011 03:29 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> The m64 build fails because of the -Wl,-undefined -Wl,dynamic_lookup
>
> FAOD, Is there some reason that this library needs to resolve symbols
> from some external source at load time?
Not that I know of. I think that's generic libtool giving you tha
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:00 PM, wrote:
>>
>> Have you run through SPEC, and SPEC06 with this change? What is the
>> instrumentation overhead using gcc?
>
> I don't think anyone of us ever run spec with tsan.
> Mostly because this wi
On Nov 10, 2011, at 9:40 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Thanks for catching that --- brainstorm on my part ... the code under
> discussion should have been #ifndef OBCPLUS
There is no prohibition against C having exceptions, so, doesn't matter if you
turn C++ off, you can still throw through C code, s
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Running valgrind even on simple testcases shows a bunch of
> memory leaks (definitely lost). This patch cures some of them.
> There are a few further leaks in the options handling.
>
> The first hunk is when this function already called concat
DR 1155 allows variables and functions with internal linkage to be used
as template arguments.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit bd15c5ecefbb9f8a3a44d2547c3a6a9881a47f31
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Thu Nov 10 21:59:59 2011 -0500
PR c++/50372
* pt.c (convert_non
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/08/11 06:45, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> This should optimize VEC_BASE that Jakub was patching by teaching
> phiopt to handle some one-statement intermediate basic-blocks.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, any comments?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/07/11 14:25, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This patch attempts to optimize VEC_BASE if we know that offsetof
> of base is 0 (unless the compiler is doing something strange, it is
> true). It doesn't have a clear code size effect, some .text
> s
On 10 November 2011 21:31, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This patch fixes some compiler memory leaks in SLP.
> For vect_free_oprnd_info I've removed the FREE_DEF_STMTS argument
> and am freeing the defs always, but set them to NULL when moving the vectors
> over elsewhere, because otherwise if ve
Hello Eric,
Thanks for review!
2011/11/10 Eric Botcazou :
>> So, what about the patch? I think since we already have zee patch it
>> would be great to use it as more general optimization. I tested it on
>> EEMBC 2.0 on Atom and it showed 1% performance gain in geomean on 32
>> bit which is really
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> DR 1155 allows variables and functions with internal linkage to be used as
> template arguments.
Yay!
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
