> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> >> I noticed most of the cgraph and IPA files use xstrdup for cgraph node
> >> names when printing to dump_file. Very leaky...
> >>
> >> What is the reason for all those xstrdups? I couldn't think of any.
> >
> > Please see [1]
Hi,
as reported in PR62248 there is a typo in gcc/config.gcc where
--with-fpu doesn't match -mfpu option for fp-armv8 value (fp-arm-v8 in
config.gcc). Here is the patch to fix it.
Thanks,
Yvan
2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
* config.gcc: Fix fp-armv8 option for arm*-*-* targets.
diff --git a/
Hi again,
On 08/26/2014 08:58 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 08/26/2014 12:01 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
the difference, for the latter and for more complex cases, is that
adjust_temp_type calls cp_fold_convert which ends up returning a
NOP_EXPR (eg, build in fold_convert_loc).
Perhaps we should a
Hi,
As I analyzed in bug pr62178, current candidate selecting algorithm can't
find out the optimal solution in some scenarios. I am trying to improve it
but before that, I need to clean up the interface of iv_ca_add_use and the
calls to it. The two calls to the function are controlled by a boolea
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> As I analyzed in bug pr62178, current candidate selecting algorithm can't
> find out the optimal solution in some scenarios. I am trying to improve it
> but before that, I need to clean up the interface of iv_ca_add_use and the
> calls to
.. two additional remarks (maybe obvious, I don't know):
- It also appears to work - for sure for all the tests in c++/52892 +
the tests in c++/52282 not involving data members (eg, the original one)
- simply unconditionally calling STRIP_NOPS right after the
cxx_eval_constant_expression at the
Hello Uroš,
On 20 Aug 15:16, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> OK with this change.
I've discovered a problem with assembler operand of
vshuf*64x2 insn.
Patch below bootstrapped and avx512-regtested.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md (define_mode_attr concat_tg_mode):
Move up.
On 27/08/14 09:04, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as reported in PR62248 there is a typo in gcc/config.gcc where
> --with-fpu doesn't match -mfpu option for fp-armv8 value (fp-arm-v8 in
> config.gcc). Here is the patch to fix it.
>
> Thanks,
> Yvan
>
> 2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
>
> * config.g
Hello!
> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>
> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
> promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
> (promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New function.
> (expand_expr_real_1): Check promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p
> and set the promoted mo
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>>
>> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
>> promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
>> (promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New function.
>> (expand_expr_real_1): Che
Hi
As reported in bug pr62151, combine pass may wrongly delete necessary
instruction in function distribute_notes thus leaving register
uninitialized. This patch is to fix the issue by checking if i2 immediately
modifies the register in REG_DEAD note. If yes, set tem_insn accordingly to
start fin
This fixes the segfaults when an unexpected EOF occurs.
Committed.
Richard.
2014-08-27 Richard Biener
* genmatch.c (peek): Fail at unexpected EOF.
(main): Do not peek at the next token as we do expect
EOF at some point.
Index: gcc/genmatch.c
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> OK with this change.
>
> I've discovered a problem with assembler operand of
> vshuf*64x2 insn.
>
> Patch below bootstrapped and avx512-regtested.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
OK with a couple of nits.
Thanks,
Uros.
> gcc/
> * config
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>>> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
* calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
(promoted_for_signed_
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
>> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>>>
>>> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
>>> promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
>>> (promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New function.
>>> (expand_expr_real_1): Check
; 2014-08-27 Bin Cheng
>
> PR rtl-optimization/62151
> * combine.c (distribute_notes): Check i2 if it modifies register
> in REG_DEAD note immediately, set tem_insn accordingly.
>
>
> pr62151-20140827.txt
>
>
> Index: gcc/combine.c
> =
On 27 August 2014 11:24, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 27/08/14 09:04, Yvan Roux wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as reported in PR62248 there is a typo in gcc/config.gcc where
>> --with-fpu doesn't match -mfpu option for fp-armv8 value (fp-arm-v8 in
>> config.gcc). Here is the patch to fix it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> As I analyzed in bug pr62178, current candidate selecting algorithm can't
>> find out the optimal solution in some scenarios. I am trying to improve it
>> but before that, I need
This removes gimple_fold_builtin_with_strlen and makes get_maxval_strlen
get an overload with an API that is convenient to use from the actual
folders.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
Richard.
2014-08-27 Richard Biener
* gimple-fold.c (get_maxval_strle
Here is the patch that uses the arm-fpus.def list.
Thanks
Yvan
2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
* config.gcc (arm*-*-*): Check --with-fpu against arm-fpus.def.
On 27 August 2014 12:35, Yvan Roux wrote:
> On 27 August 2014 11:24, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> On 27/08/14 09:04, Yvan Roux wrote:
>>
with the PR in the ChangeLog:
2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
PR other/62248
* config.gcc (arm*-*-*): Check --with-fpu against arm-fpus.def.
On 27 August 2014 13:10, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Here is the patch that uses the arm-fpus.def list.
>
> Thanks
> Yvan
>
> 2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
>
>
Hello,
This patch introduces support for vcvtps2[u]qq.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator VI8_256_512): New.
(define_insn
"avx512dq_cvtps2qq"):
Ditto.
The following fixes type guessing by handling VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR
and by properly passing down "unknown" for outermost conversions.
Btw, a case where we need some explicit type specification support
is Convert (T1)(X * Y) into (T1)X * (T1)Y which needs to eventually
use an unsigned type for the mul
Hello,
This patch introduces integer max/min AVX-512 pattern.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator VI128_256): New.
(define_insn "3"): Ditto.
--
Thanks, K
diff --gi
Hello,
Proposed patch adds patterns for vps[rl]ldq insns
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator VIMAX_AVX2): Add V4TI mode.
(define_insn "_ashl3"): Add EVEX version.
On 27/08/14 12:35, Yvan Roux wrote:
> with the PR in the ChangeLog:
>
> 2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
>
> PR other/62248
> * config.gcc (arm*-*-*): Check --with-fpu against arm-fpus.def.
>
>
OK, thanks.
R.
> On 27 August 2014 13:10, Yvan Roux wrote:
>> Here is the patch that uses
Hello,
Patch in the bottom extends interleaves toward support
of AVX-512.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_insn "avx512bw_interleave_highv64qi"): New.
(define_insn "avx2_interl
On 27/08/14 20:01, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>>
>> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
>> promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
>> (promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New function.
>> (expand_expr_real_1): Check promoted_for
On 26/08/14 23:18, Carrot Wei wrote:
> Hi
>
> In insn pattern "*andim_ashift_bfiz", if the operands[2] is larger than
> the size of register, gcc may generate invalid assembler code. If operands[2]
> is larger than the size of the underlying type of INTVAL, the following insn
> condition may also
Hello,
Patch extends `plusminus' and `avg' insn patterns
toward AVX-512BW,VL support.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
(define_mode_iterator VI12_AVX2): Add V64QI and V32HI modes.
(define_expand "_3"): Add
Andi Kleen writes:
PING!
> Andi Kleen writes:
>
> PING^2 !
>
> Would be nice to make slim bootstrap work, it really speeds it up quite
> a bit.
>
>> From: Andi Kleen
>>
>> To use gcc-{ar,ranlib} for boot strap we need to add a -B option
>> to the tool. Since ar has weird and unusual argument c
On 08/27/2014 04:41 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
.. two additional remarks (maybe obvious, I don't know):
- It also appears to work - for sure for all the tests in c++/52892 +
the tests in c++/52282 not involving data members (eg, the original one)
- simply unconditionally calling STRIP_NOPS right af
Committed on trunk at r214573, and I'll backport it on 4.9 branch.
On 27 August 2014 14:26, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 27/08/14 12:35, Yvan Roux wrote:
>> with the PR in the ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2014-08-27 Yvan Roux
>>
>> PR other/62248
>> * config.gcc (arm*-*-*): Check --with-fp
Hi all:
This patch basically is extension for r210100[1], stream out
non-explicit -fno-tree-loop-distribute-patterns since compile with
`-flto -O3 -fno-builtin` still may gen builtin function call during
LTO phase.
LTO bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
2014-09-27 Kito Cheng
Hi all:
This patch is clean up useless initialize for IRA with LRA.
2014-08-27 Kito Cheng
* ira.c (ira): Don't initialize ira_spilled_reg_stack_slots and
ira_spilled_reg_stack_slots_num if using lra.
(do_reload): Remove release ira_spilled_reg_stack_slots part.
This old one says the C++98 ANSI doesn't have hex float literals and
should error gracefully.
Fixed by changing a language feature flag as suggested by the audit
trail and by adding an error message.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
libcpp/
2014-08-27 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@ver
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> This patch introduces support for vcvtps2[u]qq.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_mode_iterator VI8_256_512):
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> This patch introduces integer max/min AVX-512 pattern.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_mode_iterator VI128_2
Hi,
On 08/27/2014 04:19 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 08/27/2014 04:41 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
.. two additional remarks (maybe obvious, I don't know):
- It also appears to work - for sure for all the tests in c++/52892 +
the tests in c++/52282 not involving data members (eg, the original one)
-
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> Proposed patch adds patterns for vps[rl]ldq insns
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_mode_iterator VIMA
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> Patch in the bottom extends interleaves toward support
> of AVX-512.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Patch extends `plusminus' and `avg' insn patterns
> toward AVX-512BW,VL support.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> (define_mode_iterator VI12_AVX2):
The rotate insn appeared right after expand.
I've done it similar to define_insn_and_split "*avx_vperm_broadcast_".
I don't see any potential losses on splitting that after reload.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/26/2014 05:59 AM, Evgeny Stupachenko wrote:
>> +(d
On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 11:02 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/06/2014 10:19 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > @@ -2772,11 +2772,11 @@ mn10300_adjust_sched_cost (rtx insn, rtx link, rtx
> > dep, int cost)
> >if (!TARGET_AM33)
> > return 1;
> >
> > - if (GET_CODE (insn) == PARALLEL)
> >
On 08/27/2014 08:48 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> Alternatively, should this simply use "single_set"?
Yes.
> (though I think that's a more invasive change, especially since some of
> the logic is for non-SETs).
I don't think that's the case. Take the tests in order:
if (mn10300_tune_cpu == PROC
On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 09:11 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 08:48 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Alternatively, should this simply use "single_set"?
>
> Yes.
>
> > (though I think that's a more invasive change, especially since some of
> > the logic is for non-SETs).
>
> I don't th
On 08/27/2014 09:32 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> * gcc/config/mn10300/mn10300.c (is_load_insn): Rename to...
> (set_is_load_p): ...this, updating to work on a SET pattern rather
> than an insn.
> (is_store_insn): Rename to...
> (set_is_store_p): ...this, updating to work
On 27 August 2014 16:22:28 CEST, Yvan Roux wrote:
>Committed on trunk at r214573, and I'll backport it on 4.9 branch.
s/true/:/
?
Thanks,
"true" seems to be used that way for aarch64*-*-* and arm*-*-* is it
preferable to change it to ";" for all occurrences ?
Thanks,
Yvan
On 27 August 2014 18:51, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 27 August 2014 16:22:28 CEST, Yvan Roux wrote:
>>Committed on trunk at r214573, and I'll backport
On Sat, 23 Aug 2014, Manuel L?pez-Ib??ez wrote:
> The problem with overriding the default in libcpp is fixed by setting
> Init(1) in c.opt to match the default. However, it is too easy to
> forget the Init(). It would be better if no Init() meant "use the
> default of libcpp". This would require c
On 27 August 2014 19:07, Yvan Roux wrote:
> "true" seems to be used that way for aarch64*-*-* and arm*-*-* is it
> preferable to change it to ";" for all occurrences ?
sorry for the typo, I meant colon and not semicolon.
> Thanks,
> Yvan
>
> On 27 August 2014 18:51, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>
C++11 adds several more headers to the minimum requirements for a
freestanding implementation.
Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 88367ee23e7a6f23fb339dd938a50a79d4eb7fb3
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Wed Aug 27 15:24:27 2014 +0100
PR libstdc++/62159
* include/Makefile
Currently a freestanding build installs the Python GDB hooks as
${libdir}/libstdc*-gdb.py (with a literal * character in the filename)
because there is no libstdc++.so library file and the wildcard doesn't
get expanded (see the install-data-local target in the
libstdc++-v3/python/Makefile.am file)
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
> PR62024 reports that we can't use __atomic_always_lock_free in
> a static assert, as the FEs say it's not a constant expression. Yet the
> docs say that the result of __atomic_always_lock_free is a compile time
> constant.
> We can fix this pretty easil
On 08/25/2014 07:43 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
* semantics.c (finish_static_assert): Strip no-op conversions.
I think I'd rather strip these in cxx_eval_builtin_function_call so that
we don't have to deal with them in various consumers.
Jason
OK.
Jason
On 2014-08-26 5:42 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch I tried. I apply it over revision 214215. Unfortunately I do
not have a small reproducer but the problem can be easily reproduced on
SPEC2000 benchmark 175.vpr. The problem is in read_arch.c:701 where float
value is compared w
On 08/26/14 13:28, Richard Sandiford wrote:
[Jeff, sorry for the duplicate, sent the original from an account that
adds disclaimers.]
No worries. Given the 3000+ messages that were waiting for me when I
got back from PTO, what's another duplicate here and there :-)
[ Big snip. ]
invalid and
On 08/26/14 00:35, Yury Gribov wrote:
Hi all,
Deja pattern in r214086's test is too strict (Asan runtime will not
always be able to detect that invalid memory access is
use-after-poison). I've cooked a trivial patch to loosen the check so
test now also works on i386.
Tested on x64 and i386. Ok
The current gfc_check_dependency check always looked at the pointer
attribute - and assumed the worst, if either the LHS or the RHS was true.
Thus, it claimed that "a" and "b" alias for the following definition:
integer, pointer :: p; integer :: a. However, as "a" has no target (or
pointer)
On 08/25/14 03:55, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello,
after fixing an issue with callgraph thunk creation, I would like to
enhance callgraph API a bit. My problem was that I was trying to
expand_thunk after a body of the original function was removed. As a
result, I created a call without arguments.
On 08/21/14 15:44, Chen Gang wrote:
int_size_in_bytes() returns HOST_WIDE_INT (64-bit), theoretically, the
maximized size is 23 -- it is sizeof("[-9223372036854775808]") for
0x8000LL.
It may not cause real world issue, but if another issues occur, it may
lead things worse.
It passes
Tobias Burnus wrote:
{
+ symbol_attribute attr1, attr2;
gfc_typespec *ts1 = &expr1->symtree->n.sym->ts;
- gfc_typespec *ts2 = &expr2->symtree->n.sym->ts;
+ gfc_typespec *ts2 = &expr2->symtree->n.sym->ts;
[Ignore the "ts2"-line change: I have accidentall
On 08/17/14 18:15, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Currently, the splitter dumpfiles only say "scanning new insn with uid = N."
and "deleting insn with uid = N.". This makes it hard to track down which
splitter actually fired, especially so if there are many similar splitters
and one is slightly broke
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Manuel L?pez-Ib??ez wrote:
> This patch is on top of
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg02244.html
>
> The main issue here is Wendif-labels, since we were not using the
> correct CPP_W_* flag. The rest are straight-forward.
>
> libcpp/ChangeLog:
>
> 2014-08-25
I claim that it is part 2 of 3 of the "CAF dep" series, but the patch
has nothing to do with it, except that it is in the way.
Technically, it just moves code from trans-intrinsic.c to trans-expr.c
and makes it available. Additionally, I support the case "offset ==
NULL_TREE", which is suppose
The attached patch addresses Jonathan Wakely's comments on the
previous version of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg02426.html
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Shouldn't there be a change to python/Makefile.am so that xmethods.py
> gets installed
On 08/26/14 15:42, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/calls.c b/gcc/calls.c
index 4285ec1..85dae6b 100644
--- a/gcc/calls.c
+++ b/gcc/calls.c
@@ -1122,6 +1122,14 @@ initialize_argument_information (int num_actuals
ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
call_expr_arg_iterator iter;
tree arg;
+if (
On 27 August 2014 22:39, Siva Chandra wrote:
> The attached patch addresses Jonathan Wakely's comments on the
> previous version of the patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg02426.html
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> Shouldn't there be a change to p
> "Siva" == Siva Chandra writes:
Siva> I had something in hook.in in my very first patch but Tom Tromey said
Siva> it was not required anymore:
Siva> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02405.html
What I meant was that there should just be a single function called by
the hook file,
Ping
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Yi Yang wrote:
> Sorry, it is a typo :(
>
> Patch v2:
>
> --
>
> 2014-08-11 Yi Yang
>
> gcc:
> * bb-reorder.c (pass_partition_blocks::gate): Replace check.
> * c-family/c-common.c (handle_section_attribute): Remove
> user_defined_section_attribute
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> "Siva" == Siva Chandra writes:
>
> Siva> I had something in hook.in in my very first patch but Tom Tromey said
> Siva> it was not required anymore:
> Siva> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02405.html
>
> What I meant was that
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I think I
> did test with the files installed, but they weren't used. I'll test
> again with the new patch.
You are probably already doing it, but just in case: are you using GDB
7.8 (or later, like ToT) ? You most likely are as otherwise
'max_len' is the maximized length of 'name', so for writing '\0' to
"name[max_len]", it is out of string's border, need use "max_len - 1"
instead of.
Pass normal test suite: "configure && make && make check && compare",
I guess, at present, it is not really used by outside, though.
2014-08-27 Ch
> "Siva" == Siva Chandra writes:
Tom> What I meant was that there should just be a single function called by
Tom> the hook file, and that it should handle the xmethod additions by some
Tom> means as well.
Siva> I misunderstood then. But, I still do not understand what you mean by
Siva> "sing
On 08/28/2014 05:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/21/14 15:44, Chen Gang wrote:
>> int_size_in_bytes() returns HOST_WIDE_INT (64-bit), theoretically, the
>> maximized size is 23 -- it is sizeof("[-9223372036854775808]") for
>> 0x8000LL.
>>
>> It may not cause real world issue, but if anot
[replying text only]
Hi Chen,
as per https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/HowToContribute
all changes to libsanitizer, even such simple ones,
have to go through the LLVM tree first.
But, what makes you think there is a bug here?
The comment in sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common.h says:
On 27 August 2014 23:38, Siva Chandra wrote:
> You are probably already doing it, but just in case: are you using GDB
> 7.8 (or later, like ToT) ? You most likely are as otherwise the tests
> added by this patch will not be exercised.
Yes, I'm testing with both 7.8 (where it should work) and an ol
On 08/28/2014 06:51 AM, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> [replying text only]
>
> Hi Chen,
> as per https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/HowToContribute
> all changes to libsanitizer, even such simple ones,
> have to go through the LLVM tree first.
>
OK, thanks, I shall notice about it
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
> This patch deletes REG_EQUAL note when a src register is replaced by a
> constant in an assignment. This is to prevent spurious equivalences
> between the constant and the expression in the REG_EQUAL note. In the
> bug reported in PR 62146,
I've applied the attached patch to fix PR target/62261
which is a sh64 specific 4.9/5 regression.
The patch handles negative shift counts at some shift
paterns for shmedia. Tested sh64-elf and sh4-unknown-linux-gnu
with no new failures. I'll backport it to 4.9 in a weak
or two.
Regards,
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Siva> I misunderstood then. But, I still do not understand what you mean by
> Siva> "single function".
>
> I re-read my original note, and I think I wasn't very clear. Sorry
> about that.
>
> All I mean here is that I think it's better to have
Siva> My patch is still using a single function to register libstdc++
Siva> xmethods. Do you mean there should be a single function for pretty
Siva> printers and xmethods together?
Yeah, that's my view.
Tom
Ping?
(My apologies if this is redundant: I tried to send one yesterday and
gnus has your message flagged as Answered, but I don't see that ping on
gmane ...)
--
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
On 27/08/14 23:02, Kugan wrote:
> On 27/08/14 20:01, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>>> 2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>>>
>>> * calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
>>> promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
>>> (promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New function.
>>
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 27/08/14 11:08, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi
>> As reported in bug pr62151, combine pass may wrongly delete necessary
>> instruction in function distribute_notes thus leaving register
>> uninitialized. This patch is to fix the issue by check
Ping?
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Wang [mailto:tony.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:15 PM
> To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3,ARM,libgcc]Code size optimization for the fmul/fdiv and
> dmul/ddiv function in libgcc
>
> Hi there,
>
> In libgcc the
Ping?
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Wang [mailto:tony.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:15 PM
> To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3,ARM,libgcc]Code size optimization for the fmul/fdiv and
> dmul/ddiv function in libgcc
>
> Step 2: Mark all the symbols
Ping?
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Wang [mailto:tony.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:15 PM
> To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3,ARM,libgcc]Code size optimization for the fmul/fdiv and
> dmul/ddiv function in libgcc
>
> Step 3: Test cases to verify
This patch is based on 1/2 and 2/2 on the series. When the patch is
approved, OpenCoarrays needs to be adapted; however, as surplus
arguments of the callee are ignored, no immediate action is required.
(And some delay avoids issues with compilers being older than the library.)
The issue comes
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014, Kugan wrote:
On 27/08/14 23:02, Kugan wrote:
On 27/08/14 20:01, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Hello!
2014-08-07 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
* calls.c (precompute_arguments): Check
promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p and set the promoted mode.
(promoted_for_signed_and_unsigned_p): New
91 matches
Mail list logo
