Re: [c-family] Fix -fdump-ada-spec ICEs

> Following this commit (r221088) testing dump-ada-spec-3.C with > > make -k check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=other/dump-ada-spec-3.C > > generates a lot of *.ads files in the gcc/testsuite/g++ directory > which are not cleaned up after completion. Sorry about that, I thought cleanup-ada-spec woul

[C++ Patch] PR 65323

Hi, this is a regression about duplicate warnings with -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant. The regression is rather old, affects 4_8-branch too, and started when check_default_argument got a perform_implicit_conversion_flags call which warns a first time, then maybe_warn_zero_as_null_pointer_con

Re: [PATCH] PR63175 - [4.9/5 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-bb-slp-9a.c scan-tree-dump-times slp2" basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Martin Sebor wrote: > Attached is a scaled down version of the test for the bug. > It fixes the scan-tree-dump-times string to match what GCC > 5 prints and moves the result checking out of the test > function and into main to prevent it from getting optimized > away (as observ

RE: [PATCH, stage1] Move insns without introducing new temporaries in loop2_invariant

> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 7:12 PM > > > > loop header > > start of loop body > > //stuff > > (set (reg 128) (const_int 0)) > > //other stuff > > end of loop body > > > > becomes: > > > > (set (reg 129) (const_int 0)) > > loop header

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR rtl-optimization/65067

> Hmm. As you also modify the no-strict-volatile-bitfield path I'm not sure > you don't regress the case where EP_insv can work on memory. I agree > that simplifying the strict-volatile-bitfield path to extract the memory > within strict-volatile-bitfield constraints to a reg and then using the >

RE: [PATCH] Fix another wrong-code bug with -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

Hi, On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 16:36:48, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Bernd Edlinger > wrote: >> >> every access is split in 4 QImode accesses. but that is as >> expected, because the structure is byte aligned. > > No, it is not expected because the CPU can handle unaligned S

RE: [PATCH] Fix PR rtl-optimization/65067

Hi, On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:09:30, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> Hmm. As you also modify the no-strict-volatile-bitfield path I'm not sure >> you don't regress the case where EP_insv can work on memory. I agree >> that simplifying the strict-volatile-bitfield path to extract the memory >> within strict-

Re: [PATCH][simplify-rtx] PR 65235: Calculate element size correctly when simplifying (vec_select (vec_concat (const_int) (...)) [...])

> The patch fixes that by calculating the size of the first element by > taking the size of the outer mode and subtracting the size of the second > element. > > I've added an assert to make sure that the second element is not also a > const_int, as a vec_concat of const_ints doesn't make sense as

Re: [PATCH/AARCH64] Fix 64893: ICE with vget_lane_u32 with C++ front-end at -O0

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:37:33PM +, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 8 February 2015 at 03:24, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > PR target/64893 > > * config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c > > (aarch64_init_simd_builtins): > >

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR rtl-optimization/65067

> I know it because strict_volatile_bitfield_p checks this: >/* Check for cases of unaligned fields that must be split. */ >if (bitnum % BITS_PER_UNIT + bitsize> modesize > > Therefore, if bitsize == modesize, we know that bitnum % BITS_PER_UNIT > must be zero. Isn't that precisely the c

Re: [PATCH/AARCH64] Fix 64893: ICE with vget_lane_u32 with C++ front-end at -O0

> On Mar 6, 2015, at 1:45 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:37:33PM +, Christophe Lyon wrote: >>> On 8 February 2015 at 03:24, Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >>>PR target/64893 >>>* config/aarch

RE: [PATCH] Fix PR rtl-optimization/65067

On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:52:53, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> I know it because strict_volatile_bitfield_p checks this: >> /* Check for cases of unaligned fields that must be split. */ >> if (bitnum % BITS_PER_UNIT + bitsize> modesize >> >> Therefore, if bitsize == modesize, we know that bitnum % BITS_PER

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 65323

... in case, I think we can as well apply the below, a tad simpler. Also passes testing. Paolo. Index: decl.c === --- decl.c (revision 221230) +++ decl.c (working copy) @@ -11227,11 +11227,8 @@ check_defa

Another tweak to c-ada-spec.c

This is an old pasto spotted by Jonathan with the help of Coverity. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 4.9 branch. 2015-03-06 Eric Botcazou Jonathan Wakely * c-ada-spec.c (dump_ada_double_name): Fix pasto. 2015-03-06 Eric Botcazou * g

[PATCH] Check all python modules in contrib/dg-extract-results.sh

Hi, I have a box, where only python-minimal-2.7 seems to be installed and I have tried to use make -k -j2; but this results in ./dg-extract-results.sh Traceback (most recent call last):   File "./dg-extract-results.py", line 13, in     import io ImportError: No module named io This causes cont

[PATCH] Fix PR63743: Incorrect ordering of operands in sequence of commutative operations

Hi, Improved canonization after r216728 causes GCC to more often generate poor code due to suboptimal ordering of operand of commutative libcalls. Indeed, if one of the operands of a commutative operation is the result of a previous operation, both being implemented by libcall, the wrong orderi

Re: [PATCH/AARCH64] Fix 64893: ICE with vget_lane_u32 with C++ front-end at -O0

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 10:03:46AM +, pins...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Mar 6, 2015, at 1:45 AM, James Greenhalgh > > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:37:33PM +, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >>> On 8 February 2015 at 03:24, Andrew Pinski wrote: > >>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM,

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On 04/03/15 23:26, H.J. Lu wrote: > Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It > doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true > for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, > address of protected data defined in the shared library may > also be external. W

Re: [PATCH] PR rtl-optimization/32219: optimizer causees wrong code in pic/hidden/weak symbol checking

On 05/03/15 15:28, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c index 7bf5b4d..777230e 100644 --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c @@ -6392,14 +6392,8 @@ arm_set_default_type_attributes (tree type) static bool arm_function_in_section

RE: [PATCH] Fix another wrong-code bug with -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

ALIGN (op0) allows a MODESIZE access. (store_bit_field, extract_bit_field): For !STRICT_ALIGNMENT explicitly generate an unaligned access if the field crosses a word boundary. testsuite: 2015-03-06 Bernd Edlinger * gcc.dg/20150306-1.c: New test. patch-volatile-bitfie

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR ipa/65318

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >Index: gimple-fold.c >> >=== >> >--- gimple-fold.c(revision 221170) >> >+++ gimple-fold.c(working copy) >> >@@ -263,7 +263,16 @@ get_symbol_constant_value (tree sym) >> >

[patch] Obvious fix for typo in gcc/real.c

Tested x86_64-linux. Committed as obvious. commit d16f0a5adc3cc29ce96e606b94c129989b4ca6ff Author: Jonathan Wakely Date: Fri Mar 6 11:04:31 2015 + * real.c (real_from_string): Fix typo in assertion. diff --git a/gcc/real.c b/gcc/real.c index 1d1d510..43f124e 100644 --- a/gcc/real.c +

Re: [PATCH] PR target/65240, Fix Power{7,8} insn constraint issue with -O3 -ffast-math

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Michael Meissner wrote: > This patch fixes PR 65240, which was a latent bug that was introduced when I > added the -mupper-regs support to the PowerPC compiler. In the PowerPC > compiler, if you use -ffast-math, the compiler allows floating point constants > in mov

Re: [PATCH, stage1] Move insns without introducing new temporaries in loop2_invariant

On 05/03/15 09:53, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: *** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog *** 2015-02-16 Thomas Preud'homme * gcc.dg/loop-7.c: Run on all targets and check for loop2_invariant being able to move instructions without introducing new temporary Thomas, Can you please confi

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR63743: Incorrect ordering of operands in sequence of commutative operations

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > Hi, > > Improved canonization after r216728 causes GCC to more often generate poor > code due to suboptimal ordering of operand of commutative libcalls. Indeed, > if one of the operands of a commutative operation is the result of a pre

Re: [PATCH] [RTL] Relax CSE check to set REG_EQUAL notes.

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:09:14AM +, Alex Velenko wrote: > I prefer adding notes in CSE instead of adding additional checks in Jump2 > and, if any, other passes, as I think it is more uniform solution and allows > single point fix. Downside is having more notes. The other downside is that eve

[patch] Fix dangling pointer in future_error::what()

This bug didn't show up with COW strings, but is a real problem with the new std::string. The fix is to call error_code::message() early and store the result in the logic_error base class during construction. Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk. commit 3f7252dcc10eba698c12460c0a74bd313c7fef01

Re: [PATCH] Improve memory usage on PR64928

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > > I am currently testing the following patch to reduce peak memory > usage of the out-of-SSA phase for the testcase in the PR. The > issue is (as usual) big live and SSA conflict graph memory use. > This side tackles live info and frees livein before c

Re: #pragma GCC unroll support

On 6 March 2015 at 02:31, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 03/05/2015 04:12 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >> >> >> Ping? >> > > Just commenting on the documentation part: [] and a few coding style nits: +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-pragma.c @@ -1459,6 +1459,10 @@ init_pragma (void) cpp_register_deferred_pragma

Re: [Patch 2/2, v3, Fortran, pr60322 a.o.] [OOP] Incorrect bounds on polymorphic dummy array

Hi everyone, please find attached the latest version of the patch with the comments from Dominique via IRC worked in. Those were mostly about clarifying comments and style. Nevertheless, thanks for your help Dominique. Still basing on the first part of the patch at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortra

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 03:26:10PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It >> doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true >> for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, >> addr

[PATCH][RFC] Fix PR63155

This fixes PR63155 and reduces the memory usage at -O0 from reported 10GB (couldn't verify/update on my small box) to 350MB (still worse compared to 4.8 which needs only 50MB). It fixes this by no longer computing live info or building a conflict graph for coalescing of SSA names flowing over abn

Re: [PATCH] PR target/65248: Copy relocation against protected symbol doesn't work

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 05:31:51PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > Protected data symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It doesn't mean > its address won't be external. This is true for pointer to protected > function. With copy relocation, address of protected data defined in the > shared library

[PATCH] Fix intelmic-mkoffload (was: [PATCH 1/4] Add mkoffload for Intel MIC)

Hi, I've found a bug in intelmic-mkoffload, it works only when the path to gcc is absolute or relative, but doesn't work when it's specified in the PATH env var. Here is the fix, I've got a piece of code from gcc/config/nvptx/mkoffload.c. Regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. Ok for trunk?

Re: libgomp nvptx plugin: rework initialisation and support the proposed load/unload hooks (was: Merge current set of OpenACC changes from gomp-4_0-branch)

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 20:25:11 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:36:08 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > Julian Brown wrote: > > > This is a version of the previously-posted patch to rework > > > initialisation and support the proposed load/unload hooks, merged to > > > go

[PATCH] optionally disable global check

Hi all! Currently !ASAN_GLOBALS disables red-zones for global variables but keeps their checks. This simple patch disables these checks too. --Marat gcc/ChangeLog: 2015-01-22 Marat Zakirov * asan.c (instrument_derefs): asan-globals=0 disable instrumentation. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 20

Re: [PATCH] ICF: move readonly decision for variables to the right place

On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > this is a variant of patch I commited. > It takes care to load the constructor to memory in sem_variable::equals > and donot touch it earlier. I also made sem_variable::parse to skip volatile > and reigster variables. > > Bootstrapped/re

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR ipa/65318

> > Yes - but I said that having an alias should have the same effect as > the MEM_REF wrapping we do in LTO (to not barf on stmt verification > if symbol merging merges an int and a float for example). Yep, though alias is bit different from LTO - in LTO we replace the decl in place, while alia

Re: [PATCH] optionally disable global check

On 03/06/2015 05:23 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote: Hi all! Currently !ASAN_GLOBALS disables red-zones for global variables but keeps their checks. This simple patch disables these checks too. --Marat Jakub, Given that this may be considered a bugfix for --param asan-globals, perhaps this is ok fo

[ARM testsuite obvious] Fixup atomic-comp-swap-release-acquire.c to not use ICF

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 09:38:51AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > It took me a while longer than expected to get round to it, but > I've committed the attached (revision 221175) as the obvious fix, after > checking that it worked on aarch64-none-elf. > > Thanks, > James > > --- > gcc/testsuite/

RE: [PATCH] Remove inefficient branchless conditional negate optimization

> Jeff Law wrote: > Can you move pr45685.c into gcc.target/i386? > > I know Richi said next stage1, but given this fixes a performance > regression for ARM and it's reverting rather than adding new code, I > think this is OK for the trunk with the testcase moved. > > So, OK with the testcase move

Re: [ARM testsuite obvious] Fixup atomic-comp-swap-release-acquire.c to not use ICF

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 04:09:40PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 09:38:51AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > It took me a while longer than expected to get round to it, but > > I've committed the attached (revision 221175) as the obvious fix, after > > checking that it

libgo patch committed: update go Go 1.4.2 release

I committed this patch to update libgo to the Go 1.4.2 release (it was at 1.4 before). Bootstrapped and ran testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian diff -r d42a0819e2eb go/gogo.cc --- a/go/gogo.ccFri Feb 06 08:17:54 2015 -0800 +++ b/go/gogo.ccThu Mar 05

web site update: Note that GCC 5 includes Go 1.4.2

I committed this patch to the GCC 5 changes.html file, to note that it includes Go 1.4.2. Ian Index: gcc-5/changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.85 diff -u -r1.85 changes.html --

Re: [patch] Optimize empty class copies within a C++ return statement

On 03/05/2015 10:20 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 03/05/2015 06:25 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: +tree ret = TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 0); +if (ret && (TREE_CODE (ret) == INIT_EXPR +|| TREE_CODE (ret) == MODIFY_EXPR) +&& TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (ret, 0)) == RESULT_DECL +

Re: [Patch,microblaze]: Optimized usage of pcmp conditional instruction.

On 03/05/15 21:12, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: Changes are incorporated. Please find the log of the updated patch. commit 91f275c144165320850ddf18e3a1e059a66c Author: Ajit Kumar Agarwal Date: Fri Mar 6 09:55:11 2015 +0530 [Patch,microblaze]: Optimized usage of pcmp conditional in

Fix gimple_ic WRT EH

Hi, this patch makes gimple_ic to purge dead EH when the direct call does not need it. Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, will commit it shortly. Honza PR ipa/65302 * value-prof.c (gimple_ic): Pure dead eh edges when needed. * g++.dg/lto/pr65302_1.C: New testcase.

Re: [PATCH] Remove inefficient branchless conditional negate optimization

Wilco Dijkstra writes: >> Jeff Law wrote: >> Can you move pr45685.c into gcc.target/i386? >> >> I know Richi said next stage1, but given this fixes a performance >> regression for ARM and it's reverting rather than adding new code, I >> think this is OK for the trunk with the testcase moved. >>

Re: [PATCH] Fix a number of -Wformat-security warnings in gcc/config/*/*

On 02/13/15 06:58, David Howells wrote: * config/avr/avr.c (avr_print_operand_address, avr_print_operand): Avoid -Wformat-security warning. * config/m68k/m68k.c (print_operand): Likewise. * config/s390/s390.c (print_operand): Likewise. * config/tilegx/tileg

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR63155

On 03/06/15 06:16, Richard Biener wrote: This fixes PR63155 and reduces the memory usage at -O0 from reported 10GB (couldn't verify/update on my small box) to 350MB (still worse compared to 4.8 which needs only 50MB). It fixes this by no longer computing live info or building a conflict graph f

Re: [PATCH] Check all python modules in contrib/dg-extract-results.sh

On 03/06/15 03:19, Bernd Edlinger wrote: Hi, I have a box, where only python-minimal-2.7 seems to be installed and I have tried to use make -k -j2; but this results in ./dg-extract-results.sh Traceback (most recent call last): File "./dg-extract-results.py", line 13, in import io Impor

Re: [PATCH] PR63175 - [4.9/5 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-bb-slp-9a.c scan-tree-dump-times slp2" basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

On 03/02/15 09:28, Martin Sebor wrote: On 03/02/2015 06:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, 27 Feb 2015, Martin Sebor wrote: Given that Martin's fix to the testcase allowed it to succeed without Richi's fix for the underlying problem, is there a modification to the testcase or a new testcase

PING^3: [PATCH]: New configure options that make the compiler use -fPIE and -pie as default option

PING. I am enclosing the patch here for review. On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 8:47 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > PING. > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:05 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> PING. >> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:03 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Mon, Jan 12, 2

Re: [PR58315] reset inlined debug vars at return-to point

On Feb 26, 2015, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > So far, all the differences I looked at were caused by padding at the > end of BBs, and by jump stmts without line numbers at the end of BBs, > both right after the debug reset stmts the proposed patch introduces. Further investigation showed there were

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, H.J. Lu wrote: > Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It > doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true > for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, > address of protected data defined in the shared library may > also be external. W

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It >> doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true >> for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, >> address of protected

[PATCH, Fortran] Sync memory action delegated to OpenCoarrays

Dear all, so far a "sync memory" statement is translated into a local "__sync_synchronize ()". The attached draft patch delegates the action for sync memory (when -fcoarray=lib is used) to the external function _gfortran_caf_sync_memory() implemented in the OpenCoarrays library. Any suggestions?

Re: [PATCH] ICF: move readonly decision for variables to the right place

> > This caused: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65334 This is another alias issue exposed by ICF. Vectorizer attempts to increase an alignment of alias by modifying its DECL_ALIGN, but it doesnot really achieve it - when outputting the definition we use DECL_ALIGN of the ult

Re: [PATCH, Fortran] Sync memory action delegated to OpenCoarrays

Dear Alessandro, Alessandro Fanfarillo wrote: so far a "sync memory" statement is translated into a local "__sync_synchronize ()". The attached draft patch delegates the action for sync memory (when -fcoarray=lib is used) to the external function _gfortran_caf_sync_memory() implemented in the Op

[patch] add LAMBDA_EXPR support to debug_tree()

Hi Jason. I know LAMBDA_EXPR will never make it to the -fdump-* files, but debugging them internally is a pain. I don't know how you fly blind :). Would it be ok to add tree dump support for them? Not pretty, but practical... Aldy commit 67794c518d439ff2f6a886b19c8e9f0ad32de43b Author: Al

Re: [PATCH] PR63175 - [4.9/5 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-bb-slp-9a.c scan-tree-dump-times slp2" basic block vectorized using SLP" 1

On 03/06/2015 10:28 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 03/02/15 09:28, Martin Sebor wrote: On 03/02/2015 06:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, 27 Feb 2015, Martin Sebor wrote: Given that Martin's fix to the testcase allowed it to succeed without Richi's fix for the underlying problem, is there a modifi

New German PO file for 'gcc' (version 5.1-b20150208)

Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted by the German team of translators. The file is available at: http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/de.po (This file, 'gcc-5.1-b20150208.de.po', h

Re: PING^3: [PATCH]: New configure options that make the compiler use -fPIE and -pie as default option

fredag 06 mars 2015 09.31.26 skrev H.J. Lu: > PING. I am enclosing the patch here for review. > Have you tested it on mips? gcc pass -mno-shared if HAVE_AS_NO_SHARED is defened in config/mips/gnu-user.h. -mshared don't get enable. /Magnus G.

Re: PING^3: [PATCH]: New configure options that make the compiler use -fPIE and -pie as default option

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote: > fredag 06 mars 2015 09.31.26 skrev H.J. Lu: >> PING. I am enclosing the patch here for review. >> > Have you tested it on mips? > gcc pass -mno-shared if HAVE_AS_NO_SHARED is defened > in config/mips/gnu-user.h. -mshared don't get enable.

Re: [patch] Optimize empty class copies within a C++ return statement

On 03/06/2015 11:19 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: We are hitting the MODIFY_EXPR case. Indeed, _because_ we hit the MODIFY_EXPR is that we return the uninitialized temporary. For example, we start with: return retval = TARGET_EXPR which becomes: return D.2349 = D.2347; which th

Re: [patch] add LAMBDA_EXPR support to debug_tree()

OK, sure. Jason

Re: [patch] Optimize empty class copies within a C++ return statement

On 03/06/2015 01:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 03/06/2015 11:19 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: We are hitting the MODIFY_EXPR case. Indeed, _because_ we hit the MODIFY_EXPR is that we return the uninitialized temporary. For example, we start with: return retval = TARGET_EXPR which becomes:

Re: [C++ PATCH, RFC] PR c++/63959, continued

On 01/19/2015 11:28 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: * class.c (check_field_decls): If any field is volatile, make the class type have complex copy/move operations. Discussion on the cxx-abi list points out that this breaks ABI compatibility between C and C++, and is therefore unacceptab

Re: [patch] Optimize empty class copies within a C++ return statement

On 03/06/2015 04:54 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: But doesn't this still involve a MODIFY_EXPR, i.e. return retval = D.2349? If I understand you correct, no. gimplify_return_expr creates a new temporary and uses that instead of : else if (gimplify_ctxp->return_temp) result = gimplify_ctxp

Re: [patch] Optimize empty class copies within a C++ return statement

On 03/06/2015 05:01 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 03/06/2015 04:54 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: But doesn't this still involve a MODIFY_EXPR, i.e. return retval = D.2349? If I understand you correct, no. gimplify_return_expr creates a new temporary and uses that instead of : else if (gimplify_

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 6:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It >> doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true >> for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, >> address of prote

Re: [C++ PATCH, RFC] PR c++/63959, continued

On 6 March 2015 at 23:58, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 01/19/2015 11:28 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote: >> >> * class.c (check_field_decls): If any field is volatile, make >> the class type have complex copy/move operations. > > > Discussion on the cxx-abi list points out that this breaks ABI

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:04:56AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 03:26:10PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It > >> doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true > >

[PATCH, libgfortran] PR 65200 Handle EPERM as EACCES

Hi, the attached patch makes GFortran handle errno=EPERM in the same way as EACCES (this affects only when no ACTION= specifier is used in the OPEN statement and opening the file in read-write mode fails). Ostensibly the distinction is roughly - EACCES: Insufficient privilege. E.g. do the same as

RE: [PATCH] Fix a typo in the german language translation

On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 17:52:11, Jospeh S. Myers wrote: > > > > On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > > > >> if nobody objects, I'd like to fix this in the german language > >> translation file locally. I have already informed the german language > > >

Re: Strengthen ICF hash

On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > But yes, I do not think we need to significantly slow things down in current > implemetnation when this feature does not work. Just perhaps keep track of > changes that introduce host specific stuff and not introduce these when it is > easily avoidable. K

Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:04:56AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Alan Modra wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 03:26:10PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It >> >> does

Re: #pragma GCC unroll support

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jan 30, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Mike Stump wrote: > > On Jan 30, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > >> Use error_at, and %u directly in the format. > > > > Done. > > Ping? I don't see any sign of