On 11/20/2015 05:53 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 04:04:41PM -0600, Evandro Menezes wrote:
On 11/05/2015 02:51 PM, Evandro Menezes wrote:
2015-11-05 Evandro Menezes
gcc/
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_override_options_internal):
Increase loop peel
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Sebastian Paul Pop wrote:
> > Do you recommend that we add a gcc_assert that min is always lower than max?
>
> No, min can be one less than max if the array has size zero.
Maybe a typo: do you mean max can be one less than min?
If the arr
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:11:42PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > This ought to fix the fallout from PR c/68162 fix. Here the problem is that
> > grokdeclarator created a wrong type for PARM_DECL "p". It created this decl
> > with type "const int[] *"
On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > I think you also need to decrement orig_qual_indirect, which counts the
> > number of levels of array type derivation from orig_qual_type.
>
> Thus:
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2015-12-03 Marek Polacek
>
>
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:33 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > This patch adds bulletproofing to detect purged tokens, and avoid using
> > them.
> >
> > Alternatively, is it OK to access purged tokens for this kind of thing?
> > If so, would it make more
On 27/11/15 13:53, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote:
@@ -2502,11 +2540,18 @@ arc_expand_epilogue (int sibcall_p)
/* Restore any saved registers. */
if (frame_pointer_needed)
{
- rtx addr = gen_rtx_POST_INC (Pmode, stack_pointer_rtx);
+ insn = emit_insn (gen_blockage ());
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:38 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Testcase g++.dg/template/ref3.C:
> >
> > 1 // PR c++/28341
> > 2
> > 3 template struct A {};
> > 4
> > 5 template struct B
> > 6 {
> >
On 12/03/2015 04:43 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:33 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/03/2015 09:55 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
This patch adds bulletproofing to detect purged tokens, and avoid using
them.
Alternatively, is it OK to access purged tokens for this kind of thing
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, GCC 4.7+ seems to have regressed for
-fstack-protector*, functions containing VLAs and no other arrays are not
protected anymore. Before 4.7, VLAs were gimplified as __builtin_alloca
call, which sets ECF_MAY_BE_ALLOCA and in turn cfun->calls_alloca.
These two are used
When determining if a constraint is satisfied, the function
satisfy_argument_deduction_constraint temporarily changes the
PLACEHOLDER_TYPE_CONSTRAINTS of an tree node. Since
PLACEHOLDER_TYPE_CONSTRAINTS are taken into account when determining
the equality of two types, this means that the node's ca
> >may lead to wrong code.
>
> Can you try generating a testcase?
> Because with equal vptr and voffset I can't see how that can happen unless
> some pass extracts information from the pointer types without sanity checking
> with the pointers and offsets.
I am not sure I can get a wrong code w
On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> further testing revealed an issue with va_arg handling and reverse scalar
> storage order on some platforms: when va_list is scalar, passing a field of a
> structure with reverse SSO as first argument to va_start/va_arg/va_end
> doesn't
> wor
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 02:53:06PM +0100, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 03/12/2015 10:29, Janne Blomqvist a écrit :
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > wrote:
> >> As said, we could as well use a list of candidates with NULL as record
> >> marker.
> >> Implementation cosme
On 16/11/15 10:18, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote:
+/* Expand code to perform a 8 or 16-bit compare and swap by doing
+ 32-bit compare and swap on the word containing the byte or
+ half-word. The difference between a weak and a strong CAS is that
+ the weak version may simply fail. The stro
On S/390, __builtin_return_address and __builtin_frame_address
require the -mbackchain option to work for arbitrary stack frames.
The attached patch adds the option to two test cases to make them
work.
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
* gcc.dg/
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
> On 03/12/15 05:26, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Richard Earnshaw
>> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/15 03:19, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
> On 24/11/15 09:56, Richard
Hi,
I noticed atmoic_store pattern is the only one in atomic.md that uses
memory_operand as predicate. This seems like a typo to me. It also causes
problem. The general address expression supported by memory_operand is kept
till LRA finds out it doesn't match the "Q" constraint. As a result LRA
[CC Jason for the C++ changes and Joseph for the one C change.]
Attached is a reworked and expanded patch for the bug plus three
others in the same area that I uncovered while developing and
testing the former patch:
c++/68689 - flexible array members in unions accepted in C++
c++/68478 - flexib
Hi,
this is the last patch of the series. It makes operand_equal_p to compare
alias sets even in !flag_strict_aliasing before inlining so inlining
!flag_strict_aliasing to flag_strict_aliasing is possible when callee is
merged comdat. I tried to explain it in greater detail in the comment
in ipa
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As discussed in the PR, for some permutation we can get better code
> if we try to expand it as if it was a permutation in a mode with the
> same vector size, but wider vector element. The first attempt to do this
> always had mixed r
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
