Hi Charles,
Sorry I missed this completely in my inbox.
On 31/10/15 03:34, Charles Baylis wrote:
> Hi Ramana,
>
> [revisiting https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01593.html]
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61551
>
> This patch is an initial attempt to rework the ARM
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015, Mike Stump wrote:
On Nov 3, 2015, at 1:10 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The "as if" requirement implies that any observable effects of
"the (possibly replaced) ordinary version" must be preserved.
The repeated calls to the new handler are among such effects.
Unless the standard
> Are these supposed to be fixed by Richard's change to not use
> useless_type_conversion for VCE, or is it another issue?
Richard's change not to use useless_type_conversion for VCE was causing
additional GIMPLE verification failures so I didn't pursue; I can try again,
but all the known regress
(I didn't read everything)
+/* Convert (A/B)/C to A/(B*C) */
+(simplify
+ (rdiv (convert? (rdiv @0 @1)) (convert? @2))
+ (if (flag_reciprocal_math
+ && tree_nop_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (@0))
+ && tree_nop_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (@2)))
+ (rdiv (convert @0) (convert (mu
Hello Ramana!
> Thank you for your patch - In this case before you make any more
> changes to this patch - comparing your patch and Terry's patch here
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00729.html shows no real
> differences
As I wrote in the patch, it is a port from the embedded-4_9-
Hi Tom!
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:33:17 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 03/11/15 15:19, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > I've dropped the two testcases from this patch, I'll commit in a
> > follow-up patch.
>
> Committed to gomp-4_0-branch, as attached.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/goa
> Ah - tree_ssa_useless_type_conversion and callers, during gimplification.
> I'd like to get rid of it but maybe simply delete the VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR
> case from it for now (and return true unconditionally for NON_LVALUE_EXPR).
>
> Index: gcc/tree-ssa.c
> ==
The following patch makes sure that CCP when it computes a lattice
value to UNDEFINED ends up replacing uses with default defs (and thus
removes such UNDEFINED producing defs). This optimizes the testcase
below to
:
return _6(D);
in the first CCP. Note this patch isn't mainly for the optim
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 03/11/15 16:08, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
> >
> > > On 01/11/15 19:20, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > > > On 01/11/15 19:03, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > > > > So, the new patch series is:
> > > > >
> > > > >1Re
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> The last piece for convert.c. Since convert_to_real uses fold ()
> rather than fold_buildN, I defined a new macro to keep the code
> more compact.
>
> With this committed, convert.c should be dealt with. If there's
> anything else I could he
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch makes sure that CCP when it computes a lattice
value to UNDEFINED ends up replacing uses with default defs (and thus
removes such UNDEFINED producing defs). This optimizes the testcase
below to
:
return _6(D);
in the first CCP.
On 04/11/15 08:43, Jasmin J. wrote:
> Hello Ramana!
>
>> Thank you for your patch - In this case before you make any more
>> changes to this patch - comparing your patch and Terry's patch here
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00729.html shows no real
>> differences
> As I wrote i
On 11/03/2015 06:09 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
The attached patch removes the messages "warning: source missing a
mode?" and "warning: operand ... missing mode?" (genrecog.c) for
the case that the DEST of a SET rtx has BKLmode and SRC has void
mode. The mvcle instruction on s390 has a pretty weird
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 3, 2015, at 12:46 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> This isn't just an argument about the DWARF standard though. It's an
>> argument about GCC internals. Presumably these hypothetical BLKmode
>> types would need to support addition,
>
As discussed at the bugzilla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67305
neon_vector_mem_operand is broken. As the comments says
"/* Reject eliminable registers. */", the code block at the head
of this function which checks eliminable registers is designed to do
early reject only, the
On Sep 20, 2015, at 2:40 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 20 September 2015 at 22:32, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 25 May 2015 at 22:16, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>> On 25 May 2015 at 21:56, Marek Polacek wrote:
Perhaps we should introduce GCC_BAD_LOC with a location_t argument and
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:18:37AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 2015-11-02 Nathan Sidwell
> Cesar Philippidis
>
> * internal-fn.def (GOACC_REDUCTION): New.
> * internal-fn.h (enum ifn_goacc_reduction_kind): New.
> * internal-fn.c (expand_GOACC_REDUCTION): New.
>
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:35:34AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 2015-11-02 Nathan Sidwell
> Cesar Philippidis
>
> * config/nvptx/nvptx.c: Include gimple headers.
> (worker_red_size, worker_red_align, worker_red_name,
...
I think you can approve this yourself, or do yo
On 11/02/2015 02:56 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 10/28/15 14:40, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Richard,
this patch adds folding for the new GOACC_DIM_POS and GOACC_DIM_SIZE
internal
functions. IIUC gimple_fold_call is the right place to add this.
The size of a compute dimension is very often a compile
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:38:47AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This patch are the initial set of tests. The libgomp tests use an idiom of
> summing thread identifiers and then checking the expected set of threads
> participated. They are all derived from the loop tests I recently added for
> t
Hi,
PR52272 reported a performance regression in spec2006/410.bwaves once GCC is
prevented from representing address of one memory object using address of
another memory object. Also as I commented in that PR, we have two possible
fixes for this:
1) Improve how TMR.base is deduced, so that we can
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 02:16:59PM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> --- a/gcc/c-family/c-omp.c
> +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-omp.c
> @@ -709,12 +709,21 @@ c_oacc_split_loop_clauses (tree clauses, tree
> *not_loop_clauses)
>
>switch (OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (clauses))
> {
> + /* Loop cla
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Richard,
> this patch implements VRP for the 2 openacc axis internal fns I've added.
> We know the position within a dimension cannot exceed that dimensions
> extend. Further, if the extend is dynamic, the target backend may well know
> ther
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 07:06:50PM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> @@ -856,13 +857,14 @@ gfc_match_omp_clauses (gfc_omp_clauses **cp, uint64_t
> mask,
>if ((mask & OMP_CLAUSE_DEFAULT)
> && c->default_sharing == OMP_DEFAULT_UNKNOWN)
> {
> - if (gfc_match ("default ( sh
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 11:01:57AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/03/15 10:46, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:18:37AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >>This is the core execution bits of OpenACC reductions.
> >>
> >>We have a new internal fn 'IFN_GOACC_REDUCTION' and a new
On 11/03/2015 03:44 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/03/2015 02:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 10/30/2015 01:13 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> So I suggest to do the push/pop of
Hi,
Thanks for the review and comments.
>> I thought we were mostly using the 'convert?'
>> and tree_nop_conversion_p on integers
Done. Cleared all instances of convert which are not required.
However, I am still confused about the use of "convert" in match
and simplify.
>> So all patterns loo
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > The following patch makes sure that CCP when it computes a lattice
> > value to UNDEFINED ends up replacing uses with default defs (and thus
> > removes such UNDEFINED producing defs). This optimizes the tes
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > The following patch makes sure that CCP when it computes a lattice
> > > value to UNDEFINED ends up replacing uses with default defs (and thus
> > > remove
Can anyone commit this, please?
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Grazvydas Ignotas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the 4.9 and GCC 5 backport of patch from PR67037 that's already in
> trunk.
> I've build it on 4.9 and confirmed that it works.
>
> Grazvydas
>
> Backport from mainline
> 2015-09-30 Bern
On 10/30/2015 07:03 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
+ i = tmp_i; <- Should be cleaned up
Maybe reword as "Subsequent passes are expected to clean up the extra
moves", otherwise it sounds like a TODO item.
+ read back in anotyher SET, as might occur in a swap idiom or
Typo.
+
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote:
I thought we were mostly using the 'convert?'
and tree_nop_conversion_p on integers
Done. Cleared all instances of convert which are not required.
However, I am still confused about the use of "convert" in match
and simplify.
It could be that I
Ji Jrgg,
On 02/11/15 22:31, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/02/2015 07:15 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This patch attempts to restrict combine from transforming ZERO_EXTEND
and SIGN_EXTEND operations into and-bitmask
and weird SUBREG expressions when they appear inside MULT expressions.
This is bec
Hi Cesar!
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:36:10 -0700, Cesar Philippidis
wrote:
> * Proposed fortran cleanups and enhanced error reporting changes:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02288.html
... has now been applied to trunk, in an altered version, so we now got
some divergence bet
Am Tuesday 03 November 2015, 20:13:50 schrieb Arnaud Charlet:
> > > Your ChangeLog entry is not in the proper format, see sections 6.8.1 and
> > > 6.8.2 from http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html
> > >
> > > The diff itself is OK.
> >
> > Ok, fixed this. See the new diff below.
>
> Th
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I think you should limit the effect of this patch to the dwarf2out use
> as the above doesn't make sense to me.
Since dwarf is so special, and since other clients already do something sort of
like this anyway, it isn’t unreasonable to make the
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote:
>
I thought we were mostly using the 'convert?'
and tree_nop_conversion_p on integers
Yes, on floats they shouldn't be used.
>>
>> Done. Cleared all instances of convert which are not
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch makes sure that CCP when it computes a lattice
value to UNDEFINED ends up replacing uses with default def
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I think you should limit the effect of this patch to the dwarf2out use
>> as the above doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Since dwarf is so special, and since other clients already do something so
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> On 30 October 2015 at 15:33, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29/10/15 17:23, Jim Wilson wrote:
>>> I noticed a comment typo in this file while using grep to look for
>>> other stuff. The typo is easy to fix.
>>>
>>> I tried runn
> > > > Your ChangeLog entry is not in the proper format, see sections 6.8.1
> > > > and
> > > > 6.8.2 from http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html
> > > >
> > > > The diff itself is OK.
> > >
> > > Ok, fixed this. See the new diff below.
> >
> > This is now OK, you can go ahead and com
This patch updates the processing of OpenACC declare directive for
Fortran in the following areas:
1) module support
2) device_resident and link clauses
3) clause checking
4) directive generation
Commentary on the changes is included as an attachment
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
I don't really remember what the tests !TYPE_UNSIGNED (type) and
tree_int_cst_sgn are for in the other pattern, but since you are only moving
the transformation...
+/* Optimize (X & (-A)) / A where A is a power of 2, to X >> log2(A) */
+(for div (exact
Hi,
Depending on assembler syntax and supported addressing modes, several
targets need to know the machine mode for a memory access when printing
an address (i.e. for automodify addresses that need to know the size
of their access), but it is not available with the current
TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADD
On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 05:38:35PM +0100, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> Trying to push these now (svn!), patch 2 is going first.
>
> I realize my second iteration of patch 1/2, dropped the testcases from the
> first version. Okay to include those as per
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg002
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>> I don't really remember what the tests !TYPE_UNSIGNED (type) and
>>> tree_int_cst_sgn are for in the other pattern, but since you are only
>>> moving
>>> the transformation...
>>
>>
>> +/* Optimize
On 11/02/2015 05:35 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+/* Size of buffer needed for worker reductions. This has to be
Maybe "description" rather than "Size" since there's really four
variables we're covering with the comment.
+ worker_red_size = (worker_red_size + worker_red_align - 1)
+
On 04/11/15 11:37, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 02/11/15 22:31, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/02/2015 07:15 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This patch attempts to restrict combine from transforming ZERO_EXTEND
and SIGN_EXTEND operations into and-bitmask
and weird SUBREG expressions when they appear in
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The following patch makes sure that CCP
On 11/04/15 05:26, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Richard,
this patch implements VRP for the 2 openacc axis internal fns I've added.
We know the position within a dimension cannot exceed that dimensions
extend. Further, if the extend is dynamic, the
On 10/30/2015 04:16 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
The idea is to more gracefully handle merger conflict markers
in the source code being compiled. Specifically, in the C and
C++ frontends, if we're about to emit an error, see if the
source code is at a merger conflict marker, and if so, emit
a more s
On 11/04/15 05:01, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:35:34AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
2015-11-02 Nathan Sidwell
Cesar Philippidis
* config/nvptx/nvptx.c: Include gimple headers.
(worker_red_size, worker_red_align, worker_red_name,
...
I think
On 11/04/15 05:31, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 11:01:57AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 11/03/15 10:46, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:18:37AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
This is the core execution bits of OpenACC reductions.
We have a new internal fn 'IFN
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:32:52AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > The last piece for convert.c. Since convert_to_real uses fold ()
> > rather than fold_buildN, I defined a new macro to keep the code
> > more compact.
> >
> > With this commi
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 08:58:26AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/04/15 05:31, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 11:01:57AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >>On 11/03/15 10:46, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 11:18:37AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This is
On 11/04/15 08:27, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/02/2015 05:35 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
There are two such switch statements, and it's possible to write this more
compactly:
if (!INTEGRAL_MODE_P (...))
code = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR;
if (GET_MODE_SIZE (...) == 8)
fn = CMP_SWAPLL;
Not
Hi,
this patch uses the the decl_type variable more consistently in
create_variable_info_for_1.
Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64.
Committed to trunk as trivial.
Thanks,
- Tom
Use decl_type in create_variable_info_for_1
2015-11-04 Tom de Vries
* tree-ssa-structalias.c (create_varia
On 04/11/15 10:28, Richard Biener wrote:
I think I can postpone the creation of the heapvar till where you suggest in
>create_variable_info_for_1, but I'd still need a means
>to communicate the TREE_TYPE (field_type) from push_fields_onto_fieldstack to
>create_variable_info_for_1.
>
>A simple imp
On 03/11/15 17:09, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:36:45PM +, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Now that PR63304 is fixed and we have an option to address
>> any part of the memory using adrp / add or adrp / ldr instructions
>> it makes sense to switch out lit
On 11/03/2015 02:34 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>> @@ -14279,8 +14272,9 @@ tsubst_copy (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t
>> complain, tree in_decl)
>> return tsubst_binary_right_fold (t, args, complain, in_decl);
>>
>> default:
>> - /* We shouldn't get here, but keep going if !ENABLE
> s/explicitely/explicitly/ And remove the '*' from the 2nd and 3rd lines
> of the comment.
>
> It looks like get_ctor_element_at_index has numerous formatting
> problems. In particular you didn't indent the braces across the board
> properly. Also check for tabs vs spaces issues please.
Yes, y
This patch adds hints to the option-not-found error in the driver,
using the Levenshtein distance implementation posted here:
"[PATCH 0/2] Levenshtein-based suggestions (v3)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03379.html
It splits out the identifier-based implementation into a new
spe
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/04/15 05:26, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>>>
>>> Richard,
>>> this patch implements VRP for the 2 openacc axis internal fns I've added.
>>> We know the position within a dimension
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/03/2015 03:44 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 11/03/2015 02:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 01:13 PM, Ri
On 11/04/2015 03:39 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:36:10 -0700, Cesar Philippidis
> wrote:
>> * Proposed fortran cleanups and enhanced error reporting changes:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02288.html
>
> ... has now been applied to trunk, in an alt
I share your concerns, but I'm also sympathetic to the changes that
the Taller Technologies team are trying to make, to allow libstdc++ to
be more useful in exception-free systems.
At the very least the patch to doc/xml/manual/configure.xml must
document that this option enables behaviour that vi
On Thu, Oct 29 2015, Andreas Arnez wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29 2015, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> [...]
>> i.e. the breakpoint on the code inside the loop is reached before the
>> while statement itself. This may be the expected behaviour with your
>> patch, but I'm not sure it's really desirable for debug
On 04/11/15 09:47, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
+/* Check that the loop has been split off into a function. */
>+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "(?n);; Function .*foo._omp_fn.0" 1
"optimized" } } */
For C we get:
;; Function foo._omp_fn.0 (foo._omp_fn.0, funcdef_no=12, decl_uid=2534,
cg
On 11/03/2015 02:35 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> This is good fore the trunk too. Please install.
>
> Thanks!
>
> jeff
Committed as r229758.
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
Dear All,
The patch for these PRs is fully explained by the the comments and/or
changelogs. PR66465 has no connection with PR68196, other than Damian
asking if it is connected!
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64/FC21 - OK for trunk and a few
weeks later 4.9 and 5 branches?
Cheers
Paul
2015-1
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:04:19PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 07:03 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> >+ i = tmp_i; <- Should be cleaned up
>
> Maybe reword as "Subsequent passes are expected to clean up the
> extra moves", otherwise it sounds like a TODO item.
>
> >+ read back
On 11/04/2015 09:03 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:32:52AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
The last piece for convert.c. Since convert_to_real uses fold ()
rather than fold_buildN, I defined a new macro to keep the code
mo
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> This patch adds a test to make sure __float128 and __ibm128 are not allowed to
> be combined in binary operations. I re-ran the test suite on power8 little
> endian, and this test passed. Once the preceeding 16 patches are applied to
>
On 11/02/2015 12:28 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
The header reduction didn't seem to handle the vms targets correctly.
This reverts that part of Andrew's patch which allows the alpha,
alpha64 and ia64 vms targets to build again.
Installed on the trunk. That covers all the fallout from standard
buil
Another iteration of trying to fix the regression caused by r223098
("Implement -Wmisleading-indentation"). Patch #1 is the same as v1,
except for some minor changes to the test case. Patch #2 fixes some
additional cases where the back-jump's location was set wrongly, and
it removes the dependenc
Since r223098 ("Implement -Wmisleading-indentation") the backward-jump
generated for a C while- or for-loop can get the wrong line number.
This is because the check for misleading indentation peeks ahead one
token, advancing input_location to after the loop, and then
c_finish_loop() creates the bac
After parsing an unconditional "while"- or "for"-loop, the C front-end
generates a backward-goto statement and implicitly sets its location to
the current input_location. But in some cases the parser peeks ahead
first, such that input_location already points to the line after the
loop and the gene
Hi Jim!
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:31:32 -0600, James Norris
wrote:
> On 10/27/2015 03:18 PM, James Norris wrote:
> > This patch adds the processing of OpenACC declare directive in C
> > and C++. (Note: Support in Fortran is already in trunk.)
..., and a patch adjusting some Fortran front
> > Are these supposed to be fixed by Richard's change to not use
> > useless_type_conversion for VCE, or is it another issue?
>
> Richard's change not to use useless_type_conversion for VCE was causing
> additional GIMPLE verification failures so I didn't pursue; I can try again,
> but all the k
On 11/04/2015 03:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/03/2015 03:44 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/03/2015 02:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:53 PM, M
On 11/04/15 08:27, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Adjust and applied, thanks!
nathan
2015-11-04 Nathan Sidwell
Cesar Philippidis
* config/nvptx/nvptx.c: Include gimple headers.
(worker_red_size, worker_red_align, worker_red_name,
worker_red_sym): New.
(nvptx_option_override): Initialize w
On 03/11/15 14:58, Tom de Vries wrote:
This patch adds handling of all the restrict qualifiers in the type of a
function parameter.
And committed to gomp-4_0-branch.
I've reverted this patch, and backported the version from trunk.
Committed as attached.
Thanks,
- Tom
[PATCH 1/2] Revert "Ha
Hi Thomas,
On 11/04/2015 10:49 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Jim!
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:31:32 -0600, James Norris
wrote:
On 10/27/2015 03:18 PM, James Norris wrote:
This patch adds the processing of OpenACC declare directive in C
and C++. (Note: Support in Fortran is already in
Hi Cesar!
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 19:06:50 -0800, Cesar Philippidis
wrote:
> This patch updates the fortran front end so that it supports the acc
> loop clauses in a similar manner to both the c and c++ front ends in
> addition to addressing a couple of other loose ends.
> --- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
On 11/02/2015 07:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/26/2015 09:48 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ while (TREE_CODE (oper) == NOP_EXPR)
+oper = TREE_OPERAND (oper, 0);
This is STRIP_NOPS.
+ to placement new is not checked since it's unknownwhat it might
Missing space.
+ else if (TREE_C
Hi Jakub!
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:30:28 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > gfc_match_oacc_update (void)
> > {
> >gfc_omp_clauses *c;
> > + locus here = gfc_current_locus;
> > +
> >if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&c, OACC_UPDATE_CLAUSES, false, false, true)
> >!= MATCH_YES)
> > retur
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:15:14PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
>
> > @@ -3028,6 +3015,22 @@ resolve_omp_clauses (gfc_code *code, gfc_omp_clauses
> > *omp_clauses,
> > n->sym->mark = 1;
> > }
> >
> > + /* OpenACC reduction
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:20:06PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi Jakub!
>
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:30:28 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > gfc_match_oacc_update (void)
> > > {
> > >gfc_omp_clauses *c;
> > > + locus here = gfc_current_locus;
> > > +
> > >if (gfc_match_omp_clauses (&
On 11/04/15 05:26, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Richard,
this all seems a little bit fragile and relying on implementation details?
Is the attribute always present? Is the call argument always a constant
that fits in a HOST_WIDE_INT (or even in
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:31:44AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Then let's do that rather than introduce maybe_fold.
Like so?
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for branch?
diff --git gcc/convert.c gcc/convert.c
index ec6ff37..9355f2b 100644
--- gcc/convert.c
+++ gcc/convert.c
@@ -119,1
On 11/04/2015 09:15 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
>> +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
>
>> @@ -3449,16 +3478,28 @@ gfc_trans_oacc_combined_directive (gfc_code *code)
>>sizeof (construct_clauses));
>>loop_clauses.collapse = construct_clauses.col
Hi!
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 18:21:36 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:15:14PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
> >
> > > @@ -3028,6 +3015,22 @@ resolve_omp_clauses (gfc_code *code,
> > > gfc_omp_clauses *omp_claus
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 09:39:50AM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 09:15 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> >> --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
> >> +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
> >
> >> @@ -3449,16 +3478,28 @@ gfc_trans_oacc_combined_directive (gfc_code *code)
> >> sizeo
On 4 November 2015 at 08:05, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> Sorry I missed this completely in my inbox.
>
> On 31/10/15 03:34, Charles Baylis wrote:
>> Hi Ramana,
>>
>> [revisiting https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01593.html]
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
On 11/04/2015 02:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 02:16:59PM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
>> +
>> + do
>> +{
>> + if (c_parser_next_token_is (parser, CPP_MULT))
>> +{
>> + c_parser_consume_token (parser);
>> + expr = integer_minus_one_node;
>> +}
On 10/30/2015 05:21 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
On 10/30/2015 10:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 07:42:39AM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
Another thing is what Jason as C++ maintainer wants, it is nice to get rid
of some code redundancies, on the other side the fact tha
On 11/04/2015 12:34 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:31:44AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
Then let's do that rather than introduce maybe_fold.
Like so?
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for branch?
Yes, thanks.
diff --git gcc/convert.c gcc/convert.c
index ec6f
On 11/04/2015 12:11 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/02/2015 07:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/26/2015 09:48 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ while (TREE_CODE (oper) == NOP_EXPR)
+oper = TREE_OPERAND (oper, 0);
This is STRIP_NOPS.
+ to placement new is not checked since it's unknownwhat i
Hello Ramana!
> There are usually features on the embedded-X_X-branch used to create
> releases that may not be on an FSF release branch.
Not on the embedded-5 branch and as far as I analysed it, all changes of
embedded-4.9 branch are now at Trunk.
>> I would like to ask if you have a copyright
On Nov 4, 2015, at 4:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if we'll manage to to get mode_for_size return BLKmode
> in case of an original mode that was not of a size multiple of
> HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT (and that's host dependent even…).
> We probably should use smallest_mode_for_size on a pre
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
