On 07/16/2013 08:55 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I have committed a large patch to update libgo to the library that was
part of the Go 1.1.1 release. As usual, I'm not including the entire
patch in this e-mail message, because it is too large. I'm only
including the changes to the files that are
On 11 July 2013 18:31, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Shrink-wrap optimization sinks some instructions for more
>> opportunities. It uses DF_LR_BB_INFO (bb)->def to check whether BB
>> clobbers SRC. But for ARM, gcc might generate cond_exec insns before
>> shrink-wrapping. And DF_LR_BB_INFO (bb)->def doe
Hi!
A small patch was missing from binutils configury, which I just
synced:
2013-07-16 Jan-Benedict Glaw
* configure.ac: Sync from binutils.
* configure: Regenerate.
Index: configure
===
--- configure (revisio
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:40:04PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 23:03 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Peter Bergner
>> > wrote:
>> > > David, do you prefer reverting the above hunk
Hello!
> I have committed a large patch to update libgo to the library that was
> part of the Go 1.1.1 release. As usual, I'm not including the entire
> patch in this e-mail message, because it is too large. I'm only
> including the changes to the files that are partially gccgo-specific.
> Boots
Hi,
This patch is the part of the ongoing work of ARM instruction classification
cleanup.
This patch deletes redundant values "mrs", "msr", "xtab" and "sat" from the
"insn" attribute, and moves the "clz" value to the "type" attribute. The
remaining values "mov" and "mvn" will be dealt with in a s
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Finally, while at it, I found it interesting that we have separate
> > conditions to cover MADD.fmt/MSUB.fmt (ISA_HAS_FP_MADD4_MSUB4) and
> > NMADD.fmt/NMADD.fmt (ISA_HAS_NMADD4_NMSUB4) while all the four
> > instructions need to be implemented
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > Maciej, in that case, the rest of the patch is OK for 4.9, thanks.
>
> I will apply in due course then, thanks for your review.
Regrettably after further investigation I have realised the change I
proposed inadvertently enables more than just
Ping?
> -Original Message-
> From: James Greenhalgh
> Sent: 04 July 2013 09:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: RE: [AArch64] Convert ld1, st1 arm_neon.h intrinsics to RTL
> builtins.
>
>
> > > 2013-07-02 James Greenhalgh
> > >
> > > * config/aarch64/a
On 04/07/13 09:17, James Greenhalgh wrote:
I've committed this as r200634.
As this is a bug-fix I'd like to backport it to the 4.8 branch.
I've attached a copy of the patch that applies to 4.8
and run it through testing on aarch64-none-elf with no issues.
Is this OK to commit to gcc-4_8-branch
Jakub et al,
Steffen has developed a nice fix [1] for GOMP_CPU_AFFINITY failing with
>1024 cores.
What steps are needed to get this into GCC 4.8.2?
Thanks,
Daniel
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57298
--
Daniel J Blueman
Principal Software Engineer, Numascale
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:08 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Then I agree that the hunk should be reverted so that HTM does not imply
> POWER8.
Ok, I'll bootstrap and regtest just to be sure there is no unintended
fallout for such a small path before committing. Thanks.
Peter
As reported in the PR, gfortran was lacking a check for the args= for
MIN/MAX. Those are special as they accept 'infinitely' many arguments -
while others have a finite set.
Added checks:
- Ensure that only a1=, a2=, a3= etc. is used.
- Ensure that every argument occurs only once
- ensure that
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk?
Scratch the second test case / second attachment ("fiif.f90"), which
wasn't supposed to get attached.
(If you wonder, it's Joost's/Dominique's test case, reated to
PR39290/PR40276, cf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/for
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 08:55 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> I have committed a large patch to update libgo to the library that was
>> part of the Go 1.1.1 release. As usual, I'm not including the entire
>> patch in this e-mail message, because i
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:07 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>> I have committed a large patch to update libgo to the library that was
>> part of the Go 1.1.1 release. As usual, I'm not including the entire
>> patch in this e-mail message, because it is too large. I'm only
>> including the changes to t
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Tobias Burnus wrote:
With coarrays, allocation/deallocation of coarrays requires a
synchronization with all other images. Thus, the standard restricts
changing the allocation status to: ALLOCATE and DEALLOCATE statements
plus end-of-scope deallocation.
In particular, wit
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:49 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 08:08 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > Then I agree that the hunk should be reverted so that HTM does not imply
> > POWER8.
>
> Ok, I'll bootstrap and regtest just to be sure there is no unintended
> fallout for such
On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 22:35 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 02:46:56PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > > I'd say something like (but, untested and can't test it right now (and no
> > > access to power8 anyway)):
> >
> > Do we also need to update DWARF_REG_TO_UNWIND_COLUMN sim
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 07:24:31AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> And on s/390, right now we enable HTM support in libitm when configured for
> -march=zEC12 by default (which isn't ideal).
Ok. What about the following patch (untested so far)?
It basically copies what the Power folks are doing with
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 07:03:18PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 07:24:31AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > And on s/390, right now we enable HTM support in libitm when configured for
> > -march=zEC12 by default (which isn't ideal).
>
> Ok. What about the following patch
I've merged GCC 4.8 branch revision 200985 to the gccgo branch.
Ian
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> I have regression-tested this change with the mips-linux-gnu target and
> the mips32r2/o32 multilib. I have also verified that the instructions
> affected were absent across the binaries produced by the testsuite before
> applying this change and present afterwar
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> 2013-07-16 Maciej W. Rozycki
>
> gcc/
> * config/mips/mips.h (ISA_HAS_NMADD4_NMSUB4): Remove
> TARGET_MIPS5400 checking.
OK, thanks.
Richard
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:55 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTERS): Mention HTM
> registers in the comment.
> (DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS): Subtract also the 3 HTM registers.
> (DWARF_REG_TO_UNWIND_COLUMN): Use DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS
>
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:55 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTERS): Mention HTM
>> registers in the comment.
>> (DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS): Subtract also the 3 HTM registers.
>> (
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > I have regression-tested this change with the mips-linux-gnu target and
> > the mips32r2/o32 multilib. I have also verified that the instructions
> > affected were absent across the binaries produced by the testsuite before
> > applying this c
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> The run-time selection options are -mnan=2008 and -mnan=legacy for the
> 2008 NaN and the legacy NaN mode respectively. The binary patterns of NaN
> data produced by compiler builtins or otherwise is adjusted accordingly,
> as is a `.nan' directive included now w
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> > I have regression-tested this change with the mips-linux-gnu target and
>> > the mips32r2/o32 multilib. I have also verified that the instructions
>> > affected were absent across the binaries produced by the te
Tejas Belagod wrote:
I observed that this patch causes an ICE with one of the fortran
tests. I've filed a bug report here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57912.
Thanks for the report! For some reason, the following bit from my local
tree didn't end up in the patch. Committed as R
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:31 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 11:55 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> >> * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTERS): Mention HTM
> >> registers in the comment.
> >> (DW
This patch to the Go frontend fixes a bug when there is a composite
literal that uses a struct field where the name of the field happens to
be the same as the name of a variable in an enclosing function. This
used to work fine, but it broke when I added a new field to function
closures as part of
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > * config/mips/mips.h (ISA_HAS_NMADD4_NMSUB4): Remove
> > TARGET_MIPS5400 checking.
>
> OK, thanks.
Committed now, thanks.
Maciej
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi Sandra,
>
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2013, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote
> > Or - maybe more acceptable - an optional warning, say
> > -Wportable-volatility, to warn about code for which separate
> > incompatbile definitions on different platforms (or between C
> > a
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > I only checked executables, these tests do not produce any. I didn't
> > think of checking tests that do not produce executables, because they do
> > not check run-time validity of code produced. These three tests you've
> > referred to all p
ping...
Thanks,
Dehao
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> In lookup_stmt_eh_lp, negative return value indicates a MUST_NOT_THROW
> region index. In this case, we should *not* add an EH edge during VPT.
>
> Bootstrapped and passed regression test.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
> Thanks,
> D
For libstdc++, regex.
--
Tim Shen
MAINTAINERS.patch
Description: Binary data
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >>
> >> > The next thing is how to tell GNU LD/Gold the relative order of
> >> > functions.
> >> > I.e. my_function_section.order.125 or something like that?
> >>
> >> Gold has a --
On 17/07/2013, at 2:29 AM, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> Jakub et al,
>
> Steffen has developed a nice fix [1] for GOMP_CPU_AFFINITY failing with >1024
> cores.
>
> What steps are needed to get this into GCC 4.8.2?
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57298
I
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:07 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>>> I have committed a large patch to update libgo to the library that was
>>> part of the Go 1.1.1 release. As usual, I'm not including the entire
>>> patch in this e-mail message,
40 matches
Mail list logo
