On 2014/1/1 02:45 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Dec 31, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-12-31 15:24:52 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
>> wrote:
>>> The nios2 port was just committed. Thanks to all that gave time and
>>> effort to review this.
>>
>> Just a heads-up: I see a lot of
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:41:01 -0600
Jeff Law wrote:
> Here's the final patch to remove mudflap. Per the multiple
> recommendations, it leaves the options as nops and warns for them.
Can you write something about this for changes.html?
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
g
cc1 backtrace:
arraysum.c: In function 'test_entry':
arraysum.c:14:1: internal compiler error: in cfg_layout_initialize, at
cfgrtl.c:4233
}
^
0x6c096d cfg_layout_initialize(unsigned int)
../../trunk/gcc/cfgrtl.c:4233
0xeab763 reorder_loops
../../trunk/gcc/hw-doloop.c:500
0xeacd04 reorg_l
Hi,
this patch fixes ICE seen with -mno-accumulate-outgoing-args bootstrap building
go runtime.
The ICE is in dwarf2cfi.c while checking that on all paths into given basic
block stack
frames are same. It goes away either with disabling crossjumping or sched2 but
the problem
IMO really originate
Hi,
currently we have somewhat non-sential setting for accumulate-ougoing-args.
It is disabled for Intel chips because recent chips do have stack engines making
push/pop instructions cheap, it is however enabled for AMD chips and Generic.
Originally accumulation was disabled since push/pop instruc
254.65(N=1048576)
SOR Mflops: 1131.31(1000 x 1000)
MonteCarlo: Mflops: 563.64
Sparse matmult Mflops: 1780.87(N=10, nz=100)
LU Mflops: 4118.40(M=1000, N=1000)
GCC 4.9.0 20140101 plus the predcom patch:
Composite Score: 1692.05
FFT
Hello,
this patch makes build_x_vec_perm_expr more similar to the other build_x_*
functions (I don't know why I had imagined it wouldn't be necessary).
Bootstrap+testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
2014-01-01 Marc Glisse
PR c++/59378
gcc/cp/
* typeck.c (build_x_vec_perm
Hello,
an error message like the following:
error: unable to find numeric literal operator 'operator"" iF'
for using _Complex_I can be a bit hard for users to handle. This adds a
note that -std=gnu++11 and -fext-numeric-literals might help. Ideally we
would check if the suffix is indeed recog
Hello,
this patch fixes the issue reported at
http://stackoverflow.com/q/20860535/1918193
that the error we get when implicitly constructing from an initializer
list using an explicit constructor doesn't have sfinae magic.
Bootstrap+testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
2014-01-01 Marc Gli
On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 08:46:31AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Thanks for tracking this down, this sounds like PR59436. How have you
> managed to track it down? I also wonder why it doesn't seem to affect 4.8
> when it also has the same change.
>
> Based on the comments in gengtype.c, I'd expe
On 1/1/2014, 12:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 03:22:07PM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Scimark2 is always used by Phoronix to show how bad GCC in
comparison with LLVM. It is understandable. For some reasons
phoronix is very biased to LLVM and, I'd say, a marketing machine
> gcc/
> 2013-12-30 Alexander Ivchenko
> Maxim Kuznetsov
> Sergey Lega
> Anna Tikhonova
> Ilya Tocar
> Andrey Turetskiy
> Ilya Verbin
> Kirill Yukhin
> Michael Zolotukhin
>
> * config/i386/i386
On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 07:53:48PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Without any gengtype.c changes, I wonder if just following change wouldn't
> do it, gengtype considers only char and unsigned char pointers as strings
> with the special strlen handling, all other scalar types are treated
> differentl
Ping x1
Any suggestions on this?
The background is that we cannot call cfg_layout_initialize after the
bb-reorder pass
as indicated by the following code snippet:
/* Once bb reordering is complete, cfg layout mode should not be re-entered.
Entering cfg layout mode will perform optimizatio
On Dec 31, 2013, at 11:46 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 10:39:58PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
>> In testing for wide-int, we discovered that someone seems to have blown
>> pch
> Thanks for tracking this down, this sounds like PR59436.
To confirm that, one would need to either,
On Jan 1, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 07:53:48PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> Without any gengtype.c changes, I wonder if just following change wouldn't
>> do it, gengtype considers only char and unsigned char pointers as strings
>> with the special strlen ha
On Jan 1, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> if (memcmp (tmp_optabs, this_target_optabs, sizeof (struct target_optabs)))
> -TREE_OPTIMIZATION_OPTABS (optnode) = (unsigned char *) tmp_optabs;
> +TREE_OPTIMIZATION_OPTABS (optnode) = (void *) tmp_optabs;
Oh, the cast isn't necessary.
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the avr port.
> Ok?
Ping?
* config/avr/a
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the build system (make).
>
> Ok?
Ping?
*
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the OpenMP code.
>
> Ok?
Ping?
* omp-low
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the documentation.
>
> Ok?
Ping?
* doc/g
On Jan 1, 2014, at 5:55 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
>> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
>> the entire patch.This patch covers
On Nov 26, 2013, at 1:34 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Jason Merrill writes:
>>> On 11/23/2013 02:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
@@ -2605,8 +2606,7 @@ cp_tree_equal (tree t1, tree t2)
switch (code1)
{
case IN
On Nov 23, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:21:21AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
>> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
>> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
>> the entire patch.Th
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the gengtype code.
>
> Ok?
Ping?
We'll need a gl
On Nov 28, 2013, at 6:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Jakub Jelinek writes:
>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:24:30PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we bre
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the ipa code.
>
> Ok?
Ping?
I promise, this patc
On Nov 26, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> @@ -2662,8 +2661,8 @@ iv_number_of_iterations (struct loop *loop, rtx
>>> insn, rtx condition,
>>>iv1.step = const0_rtx;
>>>if (INTVAL (iv0.step) < 0)
>>> {
>>> - iv0.step = simplify_gen_unary (NEG, comp_mode, i
On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the scheduler code.
>
> Ok?
Ping?
I promise, thi
On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 05:56:56PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> > Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> > and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> > the entire patch.T
30 matches
Mail list logo
