> The following testcase is miscompiled on i686-linux at -O3.
> The bug is in DSE record_store, which for group_id < 0 uses mem_addr
> set to result of get_addr (base->val_rtx) (plus optional offset),
> which is fine for canon_true_dependence with other MEMs in that function,
> but we also store th
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 12:03 PM
To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; Richard Biener
Cc: GCC Patches; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida;
Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: [Patch,tree-optimization]: Add new path Spli
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> PR43052 is a PR complaining about how the rep cmpsb expansion that gcc uses
> for memcmp is slower than the library function. As is so often the case, if
> you investigate a bit, you can find a lot of issues with the current
> situation in th
> >if (n_pieces >= (unsigned int) (optimize_size ? 3 : 15))
> > return false;
> > - if (piece > 4)
> > + if (TARGET_LL64 && (piece != 8) && (align >= 4))
> > +piece = 8;
> > + else if (piece > 4)
> > piece = 4;
> >dst_addr = force_offsettable (XEXP (operands[0], 0),
Hi,
Turns out the check on number of iv_uses is still too large on target hppa. It
only supports small offset in REG+offset addressing mode for floating point
load/store. Even with this restriction, the grouped version is better than
before, so I am going to further relax the check condition f
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:06:44AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > The following testcase is miscompiled on i686-linux at -O3.
> > The bug is in DSE record_store, which for group_id < 0 uses mem_addr
> > set to result of get_addr (base->val_rtx) (plus optional offset),
> > which is fine for canon_t
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Sounds like a good excuse to add a guality for Ada (which has unique
>> needs for dwarf).
>
> Well, the guality testsuite is a pain to maintain so I'd rather not.
> The GDB testsuite is clearly the right place for this kind of testcases.
Bu
> But that tests GDB and not GCCs generation of DWARF ...
But GDB only consumes the DWARF generated by GCC, it cannot synthetize it. ;-)
> which means take the other option of writing a scan-assembler testcase
> looking for the previously missing DWARF.
Fine with me (either Ada or C as far as I'
On 01/18/2016 10:45 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
which means take the other option of writing a scan-assembler testcase
looking for the previously missing DWARF.
Fine with me (either Ada or C as far as I'm concerned).
Thank you for your inputs! I’m going to try that, then. I hope this test
will
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:28:40PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> The attached patch fixes a test failure caused by expecting the
> error message for the wrong line.
Can this be committed?
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-reinterpret1.C: Fix line number that is
>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> Another patch reducing the accuracy required in the bessel_6 test.
Can this be committed?
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90: Reduce accuracy for S/390.
> >From 70a35dd6f6bf906d8e5907667ad0f04f981a61ac M
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:53:51AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:28:40PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > The attached patch fixes a test failure caused by expecting the
> > error message for the wrong line.
>
> Can this be committed?
>
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> >
Mi
> +(define_constraint "Upl"
> + "A constraint that matches two uses of add instructions."
That's not a particularly helpful description for external users of the
compiler. I think that either needs to be sufficiently precise that
people who understand the ISA but not the guts of GCC can use it,
This is a spurious error on nested subprograms with pragma Inline_Always and
Intrinsic, which comes from a thinko in check_inlining_for_nested_subprog, so
it's a regression present on the mainline and 5 branch.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 5 branch.
2016-01-18 Eric
> So, do you suggest to tweak get_addr like the patch below, and remove the
> mem_addr = get_addr (mem_addr);
> line above and the comment?
Yes, exactly. And if that doesn't easily work, then go for your solution and
add a blurb to the comment explaining why get_addr cannot be easily changed.
2016-01-17 20:53 GMT+03:00 Jakub Jelinek :
> Hi!
>
> The following patch fixes a warning in libmpx:
> ../../../../libmpx/mpxwrap/mpx_wrappers.c:492:8: warning: assignment discards
> 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
> *d = *s;
> ^
>
> Bootstrapped/reg
Hi there,
Can we have the "#pragma GCC pop_options" fix backported to GCC-5?
Patch found in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01261.html
and was committed in r228794.
The same patch applies cleanly to gcc-5, which would otherwise not be
able to use this pragma even though the sup
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Alan Lawrence
wrote:
> On 24/12/15 11:53, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> Here's a new version that fixes the gcc.dg/guality/pr54970.c failures seen
>> on
>> aarch64 and powerpc64. Prior to SRA handling constant pool decls,
>> -fdump-tree-esra-details (at -O1 -g) had s
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Turns out the check on number of iv_uses is still too large on target hppa.
> It only supports small offset in REG+offset addressing mode for floating
> point load/store. Even with this restriction, the grouped version is better
> than
Dear Paul,
Sorry for the late feedback. There is a missing right brace in
gfortran.dg/derived_constructor_comps_6.f90. This is fixed by the obvious patch:
--- ../5_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/derived_constructor_comps_6.f90
2016-01-17 19:27:04.0 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortr
In preparation for the implementation of the 'char' compatibility fix.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline.
2016-01-18 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/ada-tree.h (TYPE_IMPLEMENTS_PACKED_ARRAY_P): Rename to
(TYPE_IMPL_PACKED_ARRAY_P): ...this.
(TYPE_CAN_
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In Ada, it is possible to have nested subprograms in the following
> configuration:
>
> procedure Parent is
>type T;
>[...]
>procedure Child (Value : T) is
>begin
> [...]
>
In preparation for the implementation of the 'char' compatibility fix.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline.
2016-01-18 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/gigi.h (build_call_raise_column): Adjust prototype.
(build_call_raise_range): Likewise.
(gnat_unsigned
Jeff Law writes:
> commit 1384b36abcd52a7ac72ca6538afa2aed2e04f8e0
> Author: Jeff Law
> Date: Fri Jan 15 17:15:24 2016 -0500
>
> PR tree-optimization/69270
> * tree-ssanames.c (ssa_name_has_boolean_range): Moved here from
> tree-ssa-dom.c. Improve test for [0..1] ranve from
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> When compiling code with attribute targets on arm or aarch64,
> vector_type_mode returns different results (eg Vmode or BLKmode) depending
> on the current simd flags that are not set between functions.
>
> for example the following code:
>
On 18/01/16 11:31, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jeff Law writes:
commit 1384b36abcd52a7ac72ca6538afa2aed2e04f8e0
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Fri Jan 15 17:15:24 2016 -0500
PR tree-optimization/69270
* tree-ssanames.c (ssa_name_has_boolean_range): Moved here from
tree-ssa-dom.c
The wrong overload of _M_not_empty_function gets chosen and we treat a
null pointer-to-member as a valid target.
Tested powerpc64le-linux, comitted to trunk.
commit c0f055172fb4ceda0257a1a4ccd5f244609a0f37
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Mon Jan 18 11:25:43 2016 +
Fix construction of
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:38:37AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> On 18/01/16 11:31, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >Jeff Law writes:
> >
> >>commit 1384b36abcd52a7ac72ca6538afa2aed2e04f8e0
> >>Author: Jeff Law
> >>Date: Fri Jan 15 17:15:24 2016 -0500
> >>
> >>PR tree-optimization/69270
>
On 18/01/16 11:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:38:37AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 18/01/16 11:31, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jeff Law writes:
commit 1384b36abcd52a7ac72ca6538afa2aed2e04f8e0
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Fri Jan 15 17:15:24 2016 -0500
PR tree-optimiz
This fixes ICEs on armeb for float16x[48]_t vectors, e.g. in
check_effective_target_arm_neon_fp_16_ok.
At present, without the expander, moving v4hf/v8hf values around is done
via subregs. On armeb, this ICEs because REG_CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_P. (On arm-*,
moving via two subregs is less efficient tha
This cleans up the neon_reinterpret code on ARM in a similar way to AArch64.
Rather than a builtin backing onto an expander that emits a mov insn, we can
just use a cast, because GCC defines casts of vector types as keeping the same
bit pattern.
On armeb, this fixes previously-failing test:
gcc.ta
This fixes ICEs when trying to merge functions and variables. As this is
a fatal error in the end no need to try doing sth fancy.
Applied as obvious.
Richard.
2016-01-18 Richard Biener
PR lto/69337
* lto-symtab.c (lto_symtab_merge): Return early for mismatched
funct
Hi Bernd,
+ rtx op0 = force_reg (direct_mode, arg1_rtx);
+ rtx op1 = force_reg (direct_mode, arg2_rtx);
+ rtx tem = emit_store_flag (target, NE, op0, op1,
+direct_mode, true, false);
This is me being ignorant here... wouldn't it be easier to have a
On 18/01/16 11:43 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Fix construction of std::function from null pointer-to-member
PR libstdc++/69293
I've done it again, that was for 69243 not 69293. I have too many
similar PR numbers flying around :-(
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Did you have anu chance to look at updated patch?
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vrp.c b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
index acbb70b..208a752 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
@@ -5771,6 +5771,10 @@ register_edge_assert_for (tree n
Hi Dominique,
Late or not, thanks for the feedback. I'll fix the right brace. More
worrying is the failure with -m32. I presume that the failure with
-O0/O1 is at runtime? If not, the correction of the missing right
brace is a mysterious trigger for a fault that is optimization
dependent.
Cheers
[ was: Re: [PIING][PATCH, 9/16] Add pass_parallelize_loops_oacc_kernels ]
On 14/12/15 16:22, Richard Biener wrote:
Can the pass not just use a pass parameter to switch between oacc/non-oacc?
It can, and that means that parloops is run outside the loops pipeline.
This patch enables that.
Boo
Hello,
On 15 Jan 15:39, Alexander Fomin wrote:
> I've bootstrapped and regtested it against GCC v5 on x86_64-gnu-linux.
> OK for 5-branch?
Yes, it is ok for gcc-5-branch
--
Thanks, K
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Alexander
>
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 05:24:56PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > Hello,
> > On
This fixes missing handling of GIMPLE_COND in gimple_could_trap_p[_1].
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2016-01-18 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/69308
* gimple.c (gimple_could_trap_p_1): Handle GIMPLE_COND.
Index: gcc/gimple.c
==
[was: Re: [PIING][PATCH, 9/16] Add pass_parallelize_loops_oacc_kernels ]
On 14/12/15 16:22, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 24/11/15 13:24, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 16/11/15 12:59, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 20:52, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 0
The failures with -m32 are
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
Without the closing brace, I get
UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/derived_constructor_comps_6.f90 -O0
scan-tree-dump-times original "__builtin_free » 33
Dominique
> Le 18 janv. 2016 à 13:48,
Hi Alan,
On 18/01/16 12:14, Alan Lawrence wrote:
This fixes ICEs on armeb for float16x[48]_t vectors, e.g. in
check_effective_target_arm_neon_fp_16_ok.
At present, without the expander, moving v4hf/v8hf values around is done
via subregs. On armeb, this ICEs because REG_CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_P. (On
[ was: Re: [committed] Add oacc_kernels_p argument to
pass_parallelize_loops ]
On 18/01/16 14:07, Tom de Vries wrote:
[was: Re: [PIING][PATCH, 9/16] Add pass_parallelize_loops_oacc_kernels ]
On 14/12/15 16:22, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Tom de Vries
wrote:
On 24/
[ was: Re: [PATCH, 13/16] Add c-c++-common/goacc/kernels-*.c ]
On 09/11/15 21:07, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to:
- parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and
- map the loops onto the oacc gang dimensi
[ was: Re: [PATCH, 15/16] Add libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/kernels-*.c ]
On 09/11/15 21:10, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to:
- parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and
- map the loops onto the oacc gang
On Sun, 2016-01-17 at 18:30 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > On Sat, 2016-01-16 at 15:38 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:47:33AM -0500, David Edelsohn
Thanks Richard.
I changed the check on type as you proposed.
What about the second back-end part of patch (it has been sent 08.12.15).
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-01-18 15:44 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Did you have anu chan
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Thanks Richard.
>
> I changed the check on type as you proposed.
>
> What about the second back-end part of patch (it has been sent 08.12.15).
Can't see it in my inbox - can you reply to the mail with a ping?
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks.
>
Ping patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00784.html
thanks
On 01/13/2016 01:53 AM, Jesper Broge Jørgensen wrote:
genattrab.c can generate if statements that have very deep bracket
nesting causing clang to produce errors (when target=arm-none-eabi) as
explained at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-05/msg00032.html
At the above link it was suggested that gen
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 03:15:08PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Secondly, we're currently in a development phase where we only accept bug
> fixes for gcc-6. You should resubmit/ping the patch once stage1 opens again.
I think this is a bug fix, it is a workaround for a broken compiler that
some pe
On 24/11/15 13:21, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:50, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to:
- parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and
- map the loops onto the oacc gang dimension.
The patch series co
The following patch fixes us miscounting the number of scalar
instructions for BB vectorization leading to vectorizations that
are not profitable.
A simple fix is to count each scalar stmt at most once.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2016-01-18 Richard
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 03:24:21PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> >>As discussed here (
> >>https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00785.html ), the kernels
> >>directive does not allow the reduction clause. This patch fixes that.
> >>
> >
>
> Ping^2.
Ok.
Jakub
On 24/11/15 13:26, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 21:06, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to:
- parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and
- map the loops onto the oacc gang dimension.
The patch series co
On 18/01/16 15:15, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 01/13/2016 01:53 AM, Jesper Broge Jørgensen wrote:
genattrab.c can generate if statements that have very deep bracket
nesting causing clang to produce errors (when target=arm-none-eabi) as
explained at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-05/msg00032.html
A
On 01/14/2016 05:33 PM, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
When processing substitutions the operands are renumbered. To find a
free operand number the array used_operands_numbers is used to record
the operand numbers already in use. Currently this array is used to
assign new numbers *before* all the RTXes
Richard,
Here is the second part of patch which really preforms mask stores and
all statements related to it to new basic block guarded by test on
zero mask. Hew test is also added.
Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-01-18 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_e
On 18 January 2016 at 14:12, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
>
> On 18/01/16 12:14, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> This fixes ICEs on armeb for float16x[48]_t vectors, e.g. in
>> check_effective_target_arm_neon_fp_16_ok.
>>
>> At present, without the expander, moving v4hf/v8hf values around is done
In this PR, we find ourselves in a curious situation. When parsing this enum:
enum E { x = 1, y = x << 1 };
we process the LSHIFT_EXPR in cp_build_binary_op and call
fold_non_dependent_expr
on each of the operands. Then fold_non_dependent_expr calls
maybe_constant_value
which, for CONST_DEC
This wouldn't cover cases where this change affects the type or value of
more complicated expressions, so my preference would be to clear the
caches when we finish_enum_value_list.
Jason
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:43:07PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 06:23:05PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > BRIG_KIND_OPERAND_REGISTER = 0x300a,
> > BRIG_KIND_OPERAND_STRING = 0x300b,
> > BRIG_KIND_OPERAND_WAVESIZE = 0x3009c,
> > BRIG_KIND_OPERAND_END = 0x300d
>
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 09:58:51AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:49:12AM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > bootstrapping on i686-linux revealed the need for the following simple
> > patch. I've run into two types of compilation errors on
> > powerpc-ibm-aix (no htolen
On 12/25/2015 12:37 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
That alone would not be sufficient because more_specialized_fn()
doesn't call maybe_adjust_types_for_deduction() beforehand, yet we
have to do the decaying there too (and on both types, not just one of
them).
And maybe_adjust_types_for_deduction() see
Hi!
PDP endian is
gcc_assert (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN);
gcc_assert (WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN);
and 16-bit words, thus within uint16_t it is little endian, and the
16-bit words are ordered in larger units in big endian order.
> +#else
> + val = ((val & 0xff00ff00) >> 8) | ((val & 0xff00ff) << 8);
On Tue, 2016-01-12 at 23:21 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/12/2016 12:34 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> I looked at this code, and there are two near-identical blocks which
> >> reset all these variables. You are modifying only one of them, leaving
> >> the one inside the if { catch } thing unchanged
In this testcase, we weren't getting the benefits of fold's cleverness
in handling COND_EXPR because we were only calling fold_for_warn on the
condition itself. This patch changes check_function_arguments_recurse
to fold the entire COND_EXPR, and also fixes cp_fold to actually fold
COND_EXPR.
Hi,
this patch fixes pasto that leads to undefined symbol in the testcase in
PR69003.
Unfortunately i am not sure how to do incremental linking tests in the
testsuite.
The patch should work for the release branches, too,
Honza
Index: ChangeLog
==
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:53:41AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> In this testcase, we weren't getting the benefits of fold's cleverness in
> handling COND_EXPR because we were only calling fold_for_warn on the
> condition itself. This patch changes check_function_arguments_recurse to
> fold the en
On 01/12/2016 01:11 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 01/11/2016 10:20 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/22/2015 09:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ if (is_attribute_p ("aligned", name)
+ || is_attribute_p ("vector_size", name))
+{
+ /* Attribute argument may be a dependent indentifier. */
+
So we do need error cleanup for both blocks (A) and (B).
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR testsuite/69181
* gcc.dg/pr69181-1.c: New test file.
* gcc.dg/pr69181-2.c: New test file.
* lib/gcc-dg.exp (dg-test): Consolidate post-test cleanup of
globals by moving i
On 01/13/2016 05:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 03:33:27PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/13/2016 11:50 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
So to quash that -Wunused-parameter warning, I decided to set TREE_USED at the
place where we create those #xs parameters.
Won't that cause
On 01/18/2016 11:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:53:41AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
In this testcase, we weren't getting the benefits of fold's cleverness in
handling COND_EXPR because we were only calling fold_for_warn on the
condition itself. This patch changes check_f
This fixes PR60637 by using the appropriate built-in for the size of
the argument type. In Bugzilla Marc asked why we don't just use the
same code as for C++11, but I want to make this less intrusive change
on the branches (trunk is already OK anyway).
The new test is only run on x86 because it f
On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 14:54 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-01-17 at 18:30 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2016-01-16 at 15:38 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > >> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote
On January 18, 2016 4:59:30 PM GMT+01:00, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Hi,
>this patch fixes pasto that leads to undefined symbol in the testcase
>in PR69003.
>Unfortunately i am not sure how to do incremental linking tests in the
>testsuite.
Only with custom .exp files I guess.
>The patch should work f
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:04:12AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> This wouldn't cover cases where this change affects the type or value of
> more complicated expressions, so my preference would be to clear the caches
> when we finish_enum_value_list.
So like this?
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-
* configure.ac (CONFIG_STATUS_DEPENDENCIES): Substitute.
* configure: Regenerate.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate.
diff --git a/libcc1/configure.ac b/libcc1/configure.ac
index 6c97afd..e2e3fda 100644
--- a/libcc1/configure.ac
+++ b/libcc1/configure.ac
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ AC_CHECK_D
> Similarly to ARM, I note that Ada is affected. Indeed, with a gcc 4.9 host
> compiler, I saw a bootstrap miscompare iff including Ada; however, I was
> able to bootstrap Ada successfully, if I first built a GCC including this
> patch with --disable-bootstrap, and then used that as host compiler.
Hi,
This patch introduces an option fopt-info-oacc.
When using the option like this with a kernels region in kernels-loop.c
that parloops does not manage to parallelize:
...
$ gcc kernels-loop.c -S -O2 -fopenacc -fopt-info-oacc-all
...
we get a message:
...
kernels-loop.c:23:9: note: kernels
On 18/01/16 14:39, Jesper Broge Jørgensen wrote:
No i have not gone through copyright assignment.
This is my first time trying to contribute to a GNU project so i have tried
following the "Contributing to GCC"@
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
There i followed the advice to run the patch throu
On 01/18/2016 11:57 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:04:12AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
This wouldn't cover cases where this change affects the type or value of
more complicated expressions, so my preference would be to clear the caches
when we finish_enum_value_list.
So li
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 4:33 AM
To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; Richard Biener
Cc: GCC Patches; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida;
Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: [Patch,tree-optimization]: Add new path Split
On 01/18/2016 10:26 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces an option fopt-info-oacc.
When using the option like this with a kernels region in kernels-loop.c
that parloops does not manage to parallelize:
...
$ gcc kernels-loop.c -S -O2 -fopenacc -fopt-info-oacc-all
...
we get a messa
On 01/18/2016 07:09 AM, Jesper Broge Jørgensen wrote:
Ping patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00784.html
I'd put it in my gcc-7 queue. But if Richard, Bernd, Richi or someone
else wants to work though the changes as a bugfix for bootstrapping on
platforms with crippled compi
On Jan 18, 2016, at 8:14 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> I assumed that these differences were unintentional, so the patch
> consolidates things to make the cleanup identical between (A) and (B).
I also think this is the right path forward.
This patch follows the suggestion Jakub made in the PR and is very
straightforward.
With the patch, an abort is given on actual errors, in agreement with the
documentation for -dH.
(Yes, not very useful, but we can clear this PR)
Buffered errors bypass this abort by saving and restoring the stat
Thanks for working on this, Christophe, and sorry I missed the PR. You got
further in fixing more things than I did though :). A couple of comments:
> For the vec_set_internal and neon_vld1_dup patterns, I
> switched to an existing iterator which already had the needed
> V4HF/V8HF (so I switched t
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/25/2015 12:37 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>
>> That alone would not be sufficient because more_specialized_fn()
>> doesn't call maybe_adjust_types_for_deduction() beforehand, yet we
>> have to do the decaying there too (and on both types
AIX7 has added support for DWARF to XCOFF, but complete and correct
support did not occur with a single update and the initial release of
AIX7. The initial support defined a subset of common DWARF debug
sections. A later update added most of the remaining sections for
location lists and frames, b
The attached patch fixes the ICE reported for the test case below:
struct str {
int a;
char s[];
};
void fn1() { (struct str){1, ""}; }
While I don't think the patch is incorrect as far as it goes, it's
not the last word on the subject of initializing flexible array
members. I unc
On 01/17/2016 01:44 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
So... comments? Toon, would this help you? Could yo maybe give this
a spin?
Thanks, the nightly test at my home computer will build with your patch.
2016-01-17 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/66094
* frontend-passes.c (enum matrix
On 18/01/16 17:30 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 14:54 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Sun, 2016-01-17 at 18:30 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > On Sat, 2016-01-16 at 15:38 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This fixes PR60637 by using the appropriate built-in for the size of
the argument type. In Bugzilla Marc asked why we don't just use the
same code as for C++11, but I want to make this less intrusive change
on the branches (trunk is already OK anyway).
Sandra Loosemore writes:
> On 01/18/2016 10:26 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch introduces an option fopt-info-oacc.
>>
>> When using the option like this with a kernels region in kernels-loop.c
>> that parloops does not manage to parallelize:
>> ...
>> $ gcc kernels-loop.c -S -O2 -
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:15:01 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > II) The __offload_func_table, __offload_funcs_end, __offload_var_table,
> > __offload_vars_end are now provided by the linker script, instead of
> > crtoffload{begin,end}.o, this allows to su
On 01/18/2016 02:04 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
+(define_constraint "Upl"
+ "A constraint that matches two uses of add instructions."
That's not a particularly helpful description for external users of the
compiler. I think that either needs to be sufficiently precise that
people who
> -Original Message-
> From: Moore, Catherine
> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 8:53 AM
> To: Richard Henderson; ja...@redhat.com
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: FW: [RFA] Compact EH Patch [Ping * 2]
>
> Ping, Ping.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.g
On 18/01/16 21:24 +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This fixes PR60637 by using the appropriate built-in for the size of
the argument type. In Bugzilla Marc asked why we don't just use the
same code as for C++11, but I want to make this less intrusive change
On 01/18/2016 02:12 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/25/2015 12:37 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
That alone would not be sufficient because more_specialized_fn()
doesn't call maybe_adjust_types_for_deduction() beforehand, yet we
have to do the d
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
