On 05/15/2012 06:44 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I can't change the build_min_non_dep_loc call in build_x_binary_op to
simply use loc, that causes the diagnostic regression I mentioned
before. Sorry, I wasn't clear in my previous message, it happens when
one "naturally" just passes loc, not the EXPR_
OK.
Jason
(Originally a post to gcc@. I don't know why I bother posting
there; it usually ends up with a patch. :)
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 23:44:49 +0200
> > From: "Joseph S. Myers"
> > Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 22:06:03 +0200
>
> > And as you have discovered, there are rules fo
Hi,
On 05/16/2012 01:36 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/15/2012 06:44 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I can't change the build_min_non_dep_loc call in build_x_binary_op to
simply use loc, that causes the diagnostic regression I mentioned
before. Sorry, I wasn't clear in my previous message, it happens
An old patch I finally came around to submit.
Verified that the DVI and info output looks ok.
Ok to commit with inherent relicensing and whatever?
gcc:
* doc/tm.texi.in (Addressing Modes) :
Mention that this hook needs to be defined for native TLS.
* doc/tm.texi: Regenerat
On 05/16/2012 01:56 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
But, speaking of incremental work: what if, post the build_min_nt_loc
chunk, we handle build_min_non_dep and build_min in a case by case
way? Thus we keep around the non-_loc variant and gradually replace
each call? With testcases (small!) checking c
This patch to the Go frontend fixes the names used for types defined in
functions. Without this patch the names would use whatever appeared in
the -fgo-pkgpath or -fgo-prefix strings, which were not required to be
valid assembler identifier characters. There is no need to use the
pkgpath/prefix s
And I've committed yet another merge from gcc-4_7-branch to gccgo
branch, this time merging revision 187575.
Ian
Reviewers: asharif1, jingyu,
Message:
Hi Amhad and Jing, could you take a look at this CL at
http://codereview.appspot.com/6210060/
Thanks,
-Han
Description:
Ported r187569 from google/gcc-4_6 branch.
2012-05-11 Han Shen
Backport from mainline.
2012-05-01 Richard Earnshaw
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> config/rs6000:
>
> * rs6000-opts.h (enum processor_type): Add PROCESSOR_PPC8548.
> * rs6000-cpus.def: Reference it for cpu="8548".
> * rs6000.md (cpu attribute definition): Add ppc8548.
> * 8540.md: indic
How bugs like this were not hit earlier, I'll never understand :-)
If during reorg we delete a code label, and as a result we decide to
delete all the code following that label, we hit this condition in
jump.c:delete_related_insns():
if (was_code_label && prev && BARRIER_P (prev))
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 18:02 -0500, Dave Boutcher wrote:
> > Without this patch it is perfectly fine to assign non-transaction_safe
> > functions to function pointers marked as transaction_safe. Unpleasantness
> > happens at run time.
> >
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Patrick Marlier
wrote:
> Follow-up of Dave's patch. I would prefer to see such checks in trans-mem.c
> as follows.
> In a transaction, a function pointer can be declared and assigned but there
> is no check that the function pointer is transaction_safe. So at runti
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 01:47:51PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> This revision splits the medium/large code model toc reference after
> reload.
Ping http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg6.html
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
Ping.
Thanks,
Bill
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 22:04 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> This fixes another statement-placement issue when reassociating
> expressions with repeated factors. Multiplies feeding into
> __builtin_powi calls were not getting placed properly ahead of them in
> some cases.
>
On 05/15/2012 07:56 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
But, speaking of incremental work: what if, post the build_min_nt_loc
chunk, we handle build_min_non_dep and build_min in a case by case way?
Thus we keep around the non-_loc variant and gradually replace each
call? With testcases (small!) checking col
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> In the attached testcase, we treat:
>
> sum += x[i][0] * x[i][0] + x[i][1] * x[i][1];
>
> as being two independent strided loads: x[i][0] and x[i][1].
> On targets with appropriate support, we therefore use two interleaved
> loads rath
This libgo patch fixes the handling of LineSetFile aka DW_LNS_set_file
in DWARF line info. The DWARF number is one-based, but I am using it to
index into a zero-based array. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline and 4.7 branch.
Ian
diff -r dd8c9c3
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 08:02:25 +0200
Ping. I missed the PR number decoration on the ChangeLog entry:
PR rtl-optimization/53176
> * rtlanal.c (rtx_cost): Adjust default cost for X with a
> UNITS_PER_WORD factor for all X according to the size of
>
> Now with patch
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
> 2012-05-10 Vladimir Makarov
>
> PR rtl-optimization/53125
> * ira.c (ira): Call find_moveable_pseudos and
> move_unallocated_pseudos if only ira_conflicts_p is true.
>
Il 15/05/2012 16:18, Olivier Hainque ha scritto:
> rm -f tmp-header-vars
> ! # The first sed gets the list "header variables" as the list variables
> ! # assigned in Makefile and having _H at the end of the name. "sed -n"
> proved
> ! # more portable than a trailing "-e d" to filter out the
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> the motivation for the following is rbmj's patch for libstdc++ on VxWorks,
> cf. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00073.html
>
> Note that gfortan is used on VxWorks as the following email proves:
> http://gcc.gnu.o
101 - 122 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
