On 25 September 2013 06:41, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> I've had this sitting in my tree waiting to do something with,
>
>
> I did ask last week if someone had done it already...
Sorry :-\
>
>> I'm about to go to sleep so didn't check if the test covers a
Ping.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:32:03PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 08:35:35PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:01:36PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > I'd say the above is going to be a maintainance nightmare, with all the code
> > duplication.
Ping.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 05:49:55PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This patch amends the chunk of code where we are determining the
> type name; I haven't consider that IDENTIFIER_NODEs require special
> handling, since we need to omit the DECL_NAME. I had something similar
> in http://gcc.gn
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:34:42AM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > 2013-09-17 Marek Polacek
> > Jakub Jelinek
> >
> > PR sanitizer/58413
> > c-family/
> > * c-ubsan.c (ubsan_instrument_shift): Don't instrument
> > an expression if we can prove it is correct.
> > (ubsan
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:35:40AM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > 2013-09-16 Marek Polacek
> >
> > PR sanitizer/58420
> > * ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): Handle IDENTIFIER_NODEs
> > when determining the type name.
Ok.
Jakub
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> This larger patch moves all the immediate use and operand routines from
> tree-flow.h into tree-ssa-operands.h.
> It also moves the basic phi routines and prototypes into a newly created
> tree-phinodes.h, or tree-ssa-operands.h if they belo
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > with the attached patch the read-side of the out of bounds accesses are
>> > fixed.
>> >
Hi,
the type of class whose method is called used to be determinable (in wrong way)
by looking up type of OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT parameter. Now we determine it from
the method type of the call and this is not printed anywhere.
This adds a "cast" of the OBj_TYPE_REF_OBJECT so i can see it easily.
Boo
This hopefully fixes the bootstrap issue people were seeing.
It fixes the ICE on the file I reproduced it on with i586 bootstrap.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
I'm still reducing a testcase.
Richard.
2013-09-25 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/5
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> the type of class whose method is called used to be determinable (in wrong
> way)
> by looking up type of OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT parameter. Now we determine it from
> the method type of the call and this is not printed anywhere.
> This adds a "cast" o
Hi,
when target of polymorphic call was first determined speculatively and later
determined exactly we compare targets for a match and if they match, we use
the original speculative edge. This is becuase we may have already optimized
through this edge. The test is done by comparing decls that bri
Hi,
this is updated version of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00936.html
It updates the type inheritance graph walking algorithm to be context sensitive.
Contex is stored in ipa_polymorhic_call_context containing
- OUTER_TYPE
(a type of memory object that contains the object
The following testcase ICEd because complete_ctor_at_level_p got
a union with two initializers - and didn't like that. I think we can
get away with splicing when sorting the initializers: we already gave
an error and the program isn't accepted.
Regtested/bootstrapped on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk
This loosens the restriction of only coalescing SSA names with
the same base variable by ignoring that restriction for DECL_INGORED_P
base variables (ok, all of them can and should be anonymous SSA names
now, but code obviously hasn't catched up 100%).
This improves the code generated for the loo
Hello,
Please find the updated version of the patch in the attachment. It has
addressed the previous comments and also included some changes in order
to pass the bootstrapping on x86_64.
It's also passed the regtest on arm-none-eabi and aarch64-none-elf.
It will also fix the test failure as
Hmm.,
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 20:06:51, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> with the attached patch the read-side of the out of bounds accesses are
>>> fixed.
>
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:26:55PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This patch adds the instrumentation of VLA bounds. Basically, it just checks
> that
> the size of a VLA is positive. I.e., We also issue an error if the size of
> the
> VLA is 0. It catches e.g.
>
> int i = 1;
> int a[i][i - 2];
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This loosens the restriction of only coalescing SSA names with
> the same base variable by ignoring that restriction for DECL_INGORED_P
> base variables (ok, all of them can and should be anonymous SSA names
> now, but code obviously hasn't catched u
hmm, I don't see clearly where we loose the XEXP (x, n) information
when calling must_be_base_p(*inner) and/or must_be_index_p(*inner) in
set_address_base and set_address_index.
BTW, the validation on ARM (AARch32 and AARch64) is clean.
Thanks,
Yvan
On 24 September 2013 18:36, Richard Sandiford
On 09/25/2013 04:49 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
3 - a few routines seem like basic gimple routines, but really turn out to
require the operand infrastructure to implement... so they are moved to
tree-ssa-operands.[ch] as well. This sort of t
Hi Sandra,
thanks a lot, your comments are very welcome, especially as I am
not a native english speaker...
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:46:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>
> I have some nit-picky documentation suggestions about this patch
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00100.html
>
On 24 Sep 11:02, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Ilya Tocar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've rebased my patch.
> > Is it ok for gomp4
>
> Passing through "is_omp" looks bad - please find a more suitable place
> to attach this meta-information. From a quick look you only need
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Ilya Tocar wrote:
> On 24 Sep 11:02, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Ilya Tocar wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've rebased my patch.
>> > Is it ok for gomp4
>>
>> Passing through "is_omp" looks bad - please find a more suitable place
>> to at
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:05:21AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Bernd Edlinger
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > wi
On 09/25/2013 07:23 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Richard: I do not know, is this a political issue, that is blocking
the whole of Sandra's patch?
Actually we (softing.com) do not really care what happens to the
default setting of -fstrict-volatile-bitfields. Maybe you could look at
reviewing Sandr
On 09/24/2013 10:40 AM, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch removes REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED notes in update_inc_notes,
> as it is what the function is supposed to do (see the comments) and as
> keeping these notes produce some failures, at least on ARM.
>
> Thanks,
> Yvan
>
> 2013-09-24 Yvan Rou
On 09/24/2013 03:40 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2013, at 12:23 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
This patch removes REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED notes
>>> DF framework is supposed to do it for you.
>> Unfortunately LRA uses its own DF framew
The extend.texi context has changed due to the addition of the MSP430 port.
OK to apply?
2013-09-24 Joern Rennecke
Jeremy Bennett
* doc/install.texi (--with-cpu): Mention ARC.
(arc-*-elf32): New paragraph.
(arc-linux-uclibc): Likewise.
* doc/md.te
I was looking at the vec class to figure out the best way to do some
things and realized we have a "last" member function. Using foo.last()
is clearer than foo[foo.length() - 1]
On a related note, our current standards require a space between a
function name and the open paren for its argum
On 09/24/2013 07:57 PM, Wei Mi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch is to address the problem described here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-09/msg00187.html
>
> The patch changes ALLOCNO_MODE of a pseudo reg to be outermode if the
> pseudo reg is used in a paradoxical subreg, so IRA will not mistakenly
>
On 09/25/2013 11:33 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
I was looking at the vec class to figure out the best way to do some
things and realized we have a "last" member function. Using
foo.last() is clearer than foo[foo.length() - 1]
On a related note, our current standards require a space between a
funct
On 9/25/13 10:46 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I was going to bring it up at some point too. My preference is
strongly to simply eliminate the space on methods...
Which wouldn't be so weird: in the libstdc++-v3 code we do it all the time.
Paolo.
On 09/25/2013 09:48 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 9/25/13 10:46 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I was going to bring it up at some point too. My preference is
strongly to simply eliminate the space on methods...
Which wouldn't be so weird: in the libstdc++-v3 code we do it all the time.
Yea. I actual
On 09/24/2013 02:05 AM, Adam Butcher wrote:
Shall I push the patch below to trunk as an intermediate workaround
whilst I get to refactoring to support on-the-fly template parm synthesis?
I think let's wait for a better fix.
On the subject of on-the-fly synthesis: I haven't started yet but I'm
On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 21:07 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Richard Sandiford writes:
>
> > Sorry for the breakage. I think we need to handle INT_LIST in the same way
> > as INSN_LIST though, and eliminate in XEXP (x, 1).
> >
> > How about the attached? Testing in progress...
>
> Works for me a
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:46:12AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> I noticed that with the wrapper conversion, often you will get a
> sequence of 3 or more method calls, and its quite unbearable to have
> the spaces.
> simple things like
> int unsignedsrcp = ptrvar.type().type().type_unsigned();
>
Paolo> The series is good!
Thanks!
I'm checking it in now. I'll be around to fix up any bugs I introduce.
I'll send a note to the gcc list when I'm done, just to warn people.
Tom
> performance. For example, we have code
>
> ... (reg:DI) ...
> ...
> ... (subreg:TI (reg:DI))
> ...
> ...(reg:DI)
>
> We need two hard regs only for the second place by transforming
>
> p = (reg:DI)
>
> ...(subreg:TI p)
>
> With this patch we requires two hard regs for the all live range of the
>
> Paolo> The series is good!
>
> Thanks!
>
> I'm checking it in now. I'll be around to fix up any bugs I introduce.
> I'll send a note to the gcc list when I'm done, just to warn people.
Thank you for working on this!
Honza
>
> Tom
Hi!
This is the compiler side of the depend clause support.
If a task has any depend clauses, we pass an array of pointers
as 8th argument to GOMP_task, with value 8 ored into the 7th
argument (flags) to signalize the presence of the 8th argument.
The array starts with two integers (casted to void
On 09/25/2013 12:42 PM, Wei Mi wrote:
>> performance. For example, we have code
>>
>> ... (reg:DI) ...
>> ...
>> ... (subreg:TI (reg:DI))
>> ...
>> ...(reg:DI)
>>
>> We need two hard regs only for the second place by transforming
>>
>> p = (reg:DI)
>>
>> ...(subreg:TI p)
>>
>> With this patch we re
> Sorry for missing this problem when committing Kugan's patch.
>
> I have just committed the attached patch, which I hope fixes all the
> spaces/indentation issues introduced.
Thanks a lot!
--
Eric Botcazou
> 2013-09-24 Yvan Roux
> Vladimir Makarov
>
> * rtlanal.c (lsb_bitfield_op_p): New predicate for bitfield
> operations from the least significant bit.
> (strip_address_mutations): Add bitfield operations handling.
> (must_be_index_p): Add shifting and rotat
> FWIW, I'd prefer to keep it as-is, since must_be_base_p (x) and
> must_be_index_p (x) don't imply that we should look specifically at
> XEXP (x, 0) (rather than just X, or XEXP (x, 1), etc.). I think it's
> better to keep the code tests and the associated XEXPs together.
Feel free to revert thi
Hi,
this test case fails very often, and the reason is not in GCC but
in a missing glibc rounding support for strtod.
This patch fixes the test case, to first determine if the
rounding support is available. This is often the case for real(16)
thru the libquadmath. So even in cases where the test
Hi!
This patch fixes a problem with UDRs, where if we copy reduction
clauses to multiple constructs (on combined constructs), we weren't copying
OMP_CLAUSE_REDUCTION_PLACEHOLDER (which holds IDENTIFIER_NODE, TREE_VEC
or some similar magic used by {,c_}finish_omp_clauses later on to properly
finali
> To define for what occurrence of the pseudo we should do the
> transformation, we need to create allocnos and calculate reg classes to
> know what paradoxical subreg needs more hard regs (the transformations
> can not be done for all paradoxical subregs as my experience shows many
> RTL changes
On 24 Sep 10:04, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/27/2013 11:37 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >> This patch is still far too large.
> >>
> >> I think you should split it up based on every single mode iterator that
> >> you need to add or change.
> >
> > Problem is that some iterators
On 2013.09.25 at 12:20 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> this is updated version of
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00936.html
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux. The patch is tested by ipa-devirt9
> testcase. I have extra four, but I would like to first fix the case where the
> d
Hi,
the needed lra analyser patch was commited as r202914.
Thanks,
Yvan
On 24 September 2013 11:03, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following patch switch LRA on for AArch64. The patch introduces
> an undocumented option -mlra to use LRA instead of reload, for a
> testing purpose. Please noti
* PING * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-09/msg00039.html
Additionally pinging for:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-09/msg00031.html
On September 19, 2013 21:11, Tobias Burnus wrote:
This patch fixes two issues:
a) It could happen that no code change has happened. In that case, the
o
Bernd Edlinger wrote:
this test case fails very often, and the reason is not in GCC but
in a missing glibc rounding support for strtod.
This patch fixes the test case, to first determine if the
rounding support is available. This is often the case for real(16)
thru the libquadmath. So even in ca
Hi Tobias,
> * PING * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-09/msg00039.html
>
> Additionally pinging for:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-09/msg00031.html
Both are OK.
Thanks a lot for the patches!
Thomas
On 09/25/2013 10:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:46:12AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
I noticed that with the wrapper conversion, often you will get a
sequence of 3 or more method calls, and its quite unbearable to have
the spaces.
simple things like
int unsignedsrcp =
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 01:18:06PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/25/2013 10:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:46:12AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >>I noticed that with the wrapper conversion, often you will get a
> >>sequence of 3 or more method calls, and its quite unbe
> On 2013.09.25 at 12:20 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > this is updated version of
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00936.html
> >
> > Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux. The patch is tested by ipa-devirt9
> > testcase. I have extra four, but I would like to first fix the case w
On 09/25/2013 02:00 PM, Wei Mi wrote:
>> To define for what occurrence of the pseudo we should do the
>> transformation, we need to create allocnos and calculate reg classes to
>> know what paradoxical subreg needs more hard regs (the transformations
>> can not be done for all paradoxical subregs
> > The description is too terse. In the RTL middle-end, you shouldn't have
> > to manually deal with the REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED notes (unlike
> > REG_EQUAL and REG_EQUIV notes), as the DF framework is supposed to do
> > it for you.
>
> Unfortunately LRA uses its own DF framework.
In fact reload
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> FWIW, I'd prefer to keep it as-is, since must_be_base_p (x) and
>> must_be_index_p (x) don't imply that we should look specifically at
>> XEXP (x, 0) (rather than just X, or XEXP (x, 1), etc.). I think it's
>> better to keep the code tests and the associated XEXPs togethe
> So in the set_* routines it isn't about whether the value is definitely
> a base or a definitely an index. It's just about drilling down through
> what we've already decided is a base or index to get the inner reg or mem,
> and knowing which XEXPs to look at. We could instead have used a
> for_
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 09/24/2013 03:40 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2013, at 12:23 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> This patch removes REG_DEAD and REG_UNUSED notes
DF framework is supposed
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>>
>>> I looked at one that failed after 100 as well (20031204-1.c). In this
>>> case, it was due to expansion which was creating multiple branches/bbs
>>> from a logical OR and guessin
This patch disables aggressive loop peeling when profile is available.
This prevents extensive code bloat which leads to increased i-cache
misses.
Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
OK for google-4_8?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/loop-unroll.c
Greetings,
I committed partial backport of r202818, r202832 and r202836 to
google/gcc-4_8 branch as r202927.
2013-09-25 Paul Pluzhnikov
* libstdc++-v3/config/abi/pre/gnu.ver: Add
_ZSt24__throw_out_of_range_fmtPKcz
* libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/Makefile.am: Add snprintf_lite.
I wish there is better heuristic in the future. For now it is ok.
David
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> This patch disables aggressive loop peeling when profile is available.
> This prevents extensive code bloat which leads to increased i-cache
> misses.
>
> Bootstrapped and
I took the liberty to pick up Richard's original fvect-cost-model
patch and made some modification.
What has not changed:
1) option -ftree-vect-loop-version is removed;
2) three cost models are introduced: cheap, dynamic, and unlimited;
3) unless explicitly specified, cheap model is the default at
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> This patch adds the initial support for putting DI, DF, and SF values in the
> upper registers (traditional Altivec registers) using the -mupper-regs-df and
> -mupper-regs-sf patches. Those switches will not be enabled by default until
>
This patch conveys information about the blocks/edges in a jump
threading path. Of particular interest is information about the source
block in each edge of the path -- the nature of the block determines our
copy strategy (empty -- no copy, normal copy, joiner copy).
Rather than rediscover
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I looked at one that failed after 100 as well (20031204-1.c). In this
case, it was due to expansion which was cr
69 matches
Mail list logo
