On Thu, 11 May 2017, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >> > Uros added the testcase in 2008 -- I think if we want to have a testcase
> >> > for the original issue we need a different one. Or simply remove
> >> > the testcase.
> >>
> >> No, there is
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/11/2017 01:50 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>
>> It actually seems to handle negation as well. Which means it
>> handles disjunctive normal form.
>
> Negation is "handled" by allowing an individual predicate to be negated.
> However, the pre
Hi!
On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:50:51 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
> [...], retain the support for __secure_getenv but call it only via a
> weak reference.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, Ok for trunk, 7.x when it reopens,
> 6, 5?
Hmm, how has this been tested? Because:
> --- a/libgfortran
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Will Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had initially posted this back in Dec, at which time it
> was given an OK. Since a bunch of time has passed, I'm reposting
> to refresh memories, and ensure it's still OK. :-)
>
> I will be needing access to the create_tmp_reg_or_s
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 05/11/2017 01:50 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
>> however, it breaks bootstrap with --enable-languages=obj-c++:
>
>
> wierd, I thought --enable-languges=all enabled that (and I have seen objc
> issues pop up during development). Will take ano
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:50:51 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
> wrote:
>> [...], retain the support for __secure_getenv but call it only via a
>> weak reference.
>>
>> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, Ok for trunk, 7.x when it reopens,
>>
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I had an interesting time coming to grips with these two PRs. But it
> essentially comes down to the fold call in save_expr. With that, we can call
> fold() on an expression whose operands weren't folded yet, but that is what
> code in fold
Hi Bin,
On 4 May 2017 at 17:25, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
Hi!
On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:26:59 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:50:51 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
> > wrote:
> >> [...], retain the support for __secure_getenv but call it only via a
> >> weak reference.
> >>
>
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:26:59 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Schwinge
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:50:51 +0300, Janne Blomqvist
>> > wrote:
>> >> [...], retain the support f
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> the memory allocation for the buffer in the library matmul
> routines still has one problem: The value of 0xdeadbeef meant
> as poison could end up in the calculation of the size of the
> buffer for the blocked matmul.
>
> Th
Hi!
On Wed, 10 May 2017 17:49:48 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 07:02:15PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 16:06:10 +0200, I wrote:
> > > On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:59:02 +0200, I wrote:
> > > > OK for trunk?
> >
> > (In the mean time, I also added some mo
On Thu, 11 May 2017, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
>
> On 10 May 2017 at 16:20, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > So this is a patch that makes skipping unreachable code when
> > doing elimination possible. Previously interesting interactions
> > with tail-merging made this impossible, no
The following fixes up my earlier change in PRE for fallout with the
intricate interaction of the two "DCE" algorithms in PRE...
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
Richard.
2017-05-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/80713
* tree-ssa-pre.c (rem
Hi!
On Wed, 10 May 2017 18:28:38 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 09:29:28PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Use "oacc kernels" attribute for OpenACC kernels
> > * omp-expand.c (expand_omp_target)
> > : Set "oacc kernels" attribute.
>
> I think
Hi!
On Wed, 10 May 2017 18:30:54 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 10:57:34PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Use "oacc kernels parallelized" attribute for parallelized OpenACC
> > kernels
> Ok.
Thanks. Committed to trunk in r247957:
commit 5dd0c4e81e7a79afccfc93640
Hi Nathan,
> On 05/11/2017 06:57 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> er, the introduction of scanlang.exp broke libatomic, libgomp, and
>> libitm testing. Their logfiles show
>>
>> trunk/12-gcc/build/sparc-sun-solaris2.12/libatomic/testsuite/libatomic.log:ERROR:
>> Couldn't find library file scanlang.exp.
>
This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
re-testing everything.
Note that Mach-O and [X]COFF support in the simple-object machine
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Included the workaround for SLP now. With it, testsuite is clean on x86
> as well.
All patches in the series are ok now.
Thanks,
Richard.
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2017-05-11 Robin Dapp
>
> * tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_get_data_access_
Hi!
On Wed, 10 May 2017 18:32:28 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:27:14PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > OpenACC C front end maintenance: c_parser_oacc_single_int_clause
> Ok.
Thanks. Committed to trunk in r247960:
commit 641fc3aef896abe9687038abfb5fe186c4f350c8
From: Andi Kleen
With high -j parallelism the autofdo tests can randomly fail.
autofdo uses Linux perf to record profiling data.
Linux perf uses a locked perf buffer. By default it has
around 516k buffer per uid (/proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_mlock_kb).
An individual perf record tries to grab the
(To-list pruned, my correction doesn't need attention.)
On Thu, 11 May 2017, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
> > > build,
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen
>
> With high -j parallelism the autofdo tests can randomly fail.
> autofdo uses Linux perf to record profiling data.
> Linux perf uses a locked perf buffer. By default it has
> around 516k buffer per uid (/proc/sys/kernel/per
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
>
> On 4 May 2017 at 17:25, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Richard Biener
wrote
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:32:48AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > I had an interesting time coming to grips with these two PRs. But it
> > essentially comes down to the fold call in save_expr. With that, we can
> > call
> > fold() on an
It was pointed out by Markus that the EH emergency pool is not
kept sorted and fully merged properly for the cases of freeing
an entry before the first free entry and for the cases where
merging with the immediate successor and for the case with
merging with both successor and predecessor is possi
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:32:48AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > I had an interesting time coming to grips with these two PRs. But it
>> > essentially comes down to the fold call
Hi!
This doesn't block me in any way, but I wanted to report it anyway:
On Wed, 10 May 2017 10:26:15 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I have committed a large patch to update the Go frontend and libgo to
> the recent changes in the gofrontend repository.
Doing an incremental rebuild, that ran i
On 05/12/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
> of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
> support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
> re-testing everything.
>
> Note
Hi,
This patch add these missing intrinsics:
_xsetbv
_xgetbv
gcc/
* config/i386/i386-builtin-types.def (VOID_FTYPE_INT_INT64): New type.
* config/i386/i386-builtin.def (__builtin_ia32_xgetbv,
__builtin_ia32_xsetbv): New builtins.
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_s
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 05:42:59AM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> (To-list pruned, my correction doesn't need attention.)
>
> On Thu, 11 May 2017, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
Hi Richard,
> On 12 May 2017, at 10:24, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>
> This is a heads-up that I am in the process of implementing the last
> of Jasons review comments on the dwarf2out parts of early LTO debug
> support. I hope to post final patches early next week after thoroughly
> re-testing e
On 11/05/17 22:03 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
_Safe_container _IsCxx11AllocatorAware template allocator is only
used if C++11 Abi is not used so I simplified it.
* include/debug/safe_container.h [_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI]
(_Safe_container<>): Remove _IsCxx11AllocatorAware template
I have tested this with the full suite on Linux-PPC64. It works otherwise fine,
but there's one snag: 20_util/unique_ptr/specialized_algorithms/swap_cxx17.cc
fails, and it looks like the trait ends up instantiating the definition
of a destructor, which then ends up being hard-error ill-formed.
Tha
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> Hi Bin,
>>
>>
>> On 4 May 2017 at 17:25, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>
On 11/05/17 22:06 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
When versioned namespace is active we can avoid export of
_Rb_tree_rotate_[left,right] symbols. I also took the opportunity to
put static functions in the anonymous namespace rather than using
static. Is this usage of static still planned
2017-05-12 12:39 GMT+02:00 Ville Voutilainen :
> I have tested this with the full suite on Linux-PPC64. It works otherwise
> fine,
> but there's one snag: 20_util/unique_ptr/specialized_algorithms/swap_cxx17.cc
> fails, and it looks like the trait ends up instantiating the definition
> of a destru
On 12/05/17 12:10 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
It was pointed out by Markus that the EH emergency pool is not
kept sorted and fully merged properly for the cases of freeing
an entry before the first free entry and for the cases where
merging with the immediate successor and for the case with
mer
On 12 May 2017 at 14:06, Daniel Krügler wrote:
> 2017-05-12 12:39 GMT+02:00 Ville Voutilainen :
>> I have tested this with the full suite on Linux-PPC64. It works otherwise
>> fine,
>> but there's one snag: 20_util/unique_ptr/specialized_algorithms/swap_cxx17.cc
>> fails, and it looks like the tr
Hi,
This will be a patch series implementing an interface which estimates register
pressure on tree ssa and uses the information in predictive common optimization.
This the first patch computing map from type modes to register pressure classes.
Given there is no pseudo register on tree ssa form, w
Hi,
This patch computes register pressure information on TREE SSA by a backward live
range data flow problem. The major motivation is to estimate register pressure
for inner-most loop on TREE SSA, then other optimizations can use it. So far
the
information is used only in predcom later, but it c
Hi,
Currently available/clobber registers are computed only for GENERAL_REGS, this
patch extends it for all reg pressure classes. It also updates existing uses
in various places.
Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and AArch64. Is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2017-05-10 Bin Cheng
* cfgloop.h (struct
Hi,
This is a simple patch discarding simple element components earlier in predcom.
Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and AArch64, is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2017-05-10 Bin Cheng
* tree-predcom.c (determine_roots_comp): Skip single-elem chain.From fd3dd235dca80671d1201098c9235a17b5a2f544 Mon Sep
Hi,
Aggressive precom could result in larger number loop carried variables, causes
high
register pressure and spilling. One example is the hot loop of 436.cactusADM,
in
which >25 loop carried variables are introduced for the vectorized version loop,
depending on the vector factor. This patch co
Hi,
This patch caches initialization statements and only inserts it for valid
chains.
Looks like current code even inserts such stmts for invalid chains which will be
deleted as dead code afterwards.
Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and AArch64, is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2017-05-10 Bin Cheng
This is a followup from:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02916.html
Add an assert to leaf_function_p to ensure it is not called from a
prolog or epilog sequence (which would incorrectly return true in a
non-leaf function). There are several targets which still call
leaf_function_p,
When Jeff did the DSE improvements I was reminded that PRE didn't
fold calls properly (aka not in-place). This results in unfolded
memory ops (not inlined or removed as do nothing for size zero).
The following finally fixes that.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to t
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I have committed a large patch to update the Go frontend and libgo to
>> the recent changes in the gofrontend repository. I had postponed
>> merging changes during the GCC 7 relea
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
>
> This doesn't block me in any way, but I wanted to report it anyway:
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2017 10:26:15 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I have committed a large patch to update the Go frontend and libgo to
>> the recent changes in the gof
Hello.
After fiddling with that, I decided to come up with reworked first part
of the patch and eventual translation to a more hierarchical structure
is subject for discussion.
This first patch adds default for couple of dump functions and it helps in
future
to transform 0 to a TDF_NONE (or what
Second part changes 'int flags' to a new typedef.
All corresponding interfaces have been changed.
Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Martin
>From fdcd3bc0c76140d8d2e28cd4b8d15cc55ddba4b0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: We
Third part removes TDF_* flags mentioned in the subject. These flags are used
to enable all passes of specific type and Nathan has recently separated these
by a new pair of macros. I hope moving these to a separate enum will help even
more.
Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives
Hello,
The attached patch to libbacktrace is intended to fix a memory
allocation bug involving reading of line table information.
The scenario of interest takes place when libbacktrace reads a DWARF
line table whose directory count is zero (an unusual case). If the
memory allocator invocation tri
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> This is a followup from:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02916.html
>
> Add an assert to leaf_function_p to ensure it is not called from a
> prolog or epilog sequence (which would incorrectly return true in a
> non-leaf function).
As
This patch resolves an ICE inside the nvptx BE involving reduction
variables which are initialized by the user. E.g.
#pragma acc parallel reduction(+:var)
{
var = 1;
#pragma acc loop reduction(+:var)
...
Currently, the nvptx BE expects the internal function GOACC_REDUCTION to
hav
On 11/05/2017 10:58:52, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 11/05/17 10:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> > Resolve the regressions introduced on non-Thumb targets by the Purecode for
> > ARMv8-M Baseline patch. The TARGET_32BIT conditional has been re-added to
> > the
> > movsi expander and splitter in add
This solves a conflict between late changes to the C++17 library and
core language, which make tuple_size::value cause errors for
const structured binding declarations. The problem is that LWG 2770
wants tuple_size to be complete, but sometimes have no value
member, but the core language for struc
Ping.
Original thread: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg01314.html
(I will fix the typos which Bernhard found before submitting)
On 21 February 2017 at 16:54, wrote:
> From: Charles Baylis
>
> Hi Ramana,
>
> This patch set continues previous work on fixing the cost calculations f
On 12/05/17 15:49 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This solves a conflict between late changes to the C++17 library and
core language, which make tuple_size::value cause errors for
const structured binding declarations. The problem is that LWG 2770
wants tuple_size to be complete, but sometimes have
Alexander Monakov wrote:
> As I understand, we need to ensure that get_insns call retrieves the topmost
> sequence corresponding to the function body, not any current subsequence that
> could have been started via start_sequence. Therefore the 'prolog or epilog'
> part is a bit misleading, we coul
This patch by Than McIntosh passes in the calling (containing)
Bfunction when invoking the Backend method call_expression(), so as to
handle the case where generation of the call forces the creation of a
temp var within the calling function. Bootstrapped and ran Go tests
on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. C
My fix for PR51513 modified group_case_labels_stmt() to remove unreachable
case statements labels. Being a middle-end newbie, I incorrectly thought
group_case_labels_stmt() was only called very early, before we have a cfg.
With -O3, we can generate extra copies of the switch statement, well after
Ping...
On 04/28/17 19:41, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Ping...
>
> I attached a rebased patch file, with the doc changes and
> merge conflicts with trunk of today fixed, but otherwise
> identical.
>
>
> Thanks
> Bernd.
>
> On 04/21/17 22:26, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/21/17 21:50, Joseph Mye
Ping...
On 04/29/17 09:06, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 04/28/17 20:46, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 04/28/2017 11:27 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes I agree, that is probably not worth it. So I could try to remove
>>> the special handling of PIC+const and see what happens.
>>>
>>> However the
Ping...
On 04/29/17 19:21, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Ping...
>
> On 04/20/17 20:11, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Ping...
>>
>> for this patch:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-01/msg01351.html
>>
>> On 01/18/17 16:36, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>> On 01/13/17 19:28, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 0
Ping...
On 04/29/17 19:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Ping...
>
> I attached a rebased version since there was a merge conflict in
> the xordi3 pattern, otherwise the patch is still identical.
> It splits adddi3, subdi3, anddi3, iordi3, xordi3 and one_cmpldi2
> early when the target has no neon or iw
Ping...
On 04/29/17 19:52, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Ping...
>
> I attached the latest version of my patch.
>
>
> Thanks
> Bernd.
>
> On 12/18/16 14:14, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this splits the *arm_negdi2, *arm_cmpdi_insn and *arm_cmpdi_unsigned
>> also at split1 except for TARGET_NEON an
Ping for the C changes.
Thanks
Bernd.
On 05/03/17 15:14, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> On 05/01/17 17:54, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>>> wrote:
On 04/28/17 17:29, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Otherwise the tree.c change is ok.
>
> Thanks. Jason/Joseph, any comments?
I don't have any comments on this. (c_save_expr folds to avoid
c_fully_fold needing to go inside SAVE_EXPRs.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
Am 12.05.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Janne Blomqvist:
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Hello world,
the memory allocation for the buffer in the library matmul
routines still has one problem: The value of 0xdeadbeef meant
as poison could end up in the calculation of the size of t
On May 12, 2017 6:46:29 PM GMT+02:00, Peter Bergner
wrote:
>My fix for PR51513 modified group_case_labels_stmt() to remove
>unreachable
>case statements labels. Being a middle-end newbie, I incorrectly
>thought
>group_case_labels_stmt() was only called very early, before we have a
>cfg.
>With -O
On 5/12/17 11:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On May 12, 2017 6:46:29 PM GMT+02:00, Peter Bergner
> wrote:>> gcc/
>> PR middle-end/80707
>> * tree-cfg.c: Remove cfg edges of unreachable case statements.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/
>> * g++.dg/pr80707.C: New test.
>>
>> Is this ok for trunk
This was just something I noted while poking around. I forgot to push
the table unwinding markers in the newly added VRP dominator walk for
threading.
This never generates incorrect code, but can result in failing to catch
some jump threads as seen by the change in ssa-dom-thread-4.c.
Bo
On 05/05/2017 04:44 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
This one is more interesting as it implements hierarchical option parsing
and as a first step I implemented that for optgroup suboptions.
I haven't gone through the rest of the patches so I could be
missing some context. But I have a few observa
On 05/12/2017 07:30 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
This is a followup from:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02916.html
Add an assert to leaf_function_p to ensure it is not called from a
prolog or epilog sequence (which would incorrectly r
On 05/12/2017 10:29 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Alexander Monakov wrote:
As I understand, we need to ensure that get_insns call retrieves the topmost
sequence corresponding to the function body, not any current subsequence that
could have been started via start_sequence. Therefore the 'prolog or
If you look at certain testcases like the one for PR78972, you'll find
that the code generated by TER is maximally pessimal in terms of
register pressure: we can generate a large number of intermediate
results, and defer all the statements that use them up.
Another observation one can make is
On 05/12/2017 03:38 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
From: Andi Kleen
With high -j parallelism the autofdo tests can randomly fail.
autofdo uses Linux perf to record profiling data.
Linux perf uses a locked perf buffer. By default it has
around 516k buffer per uid (/proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_mlock_kb).
On 12 May 2017 at 14:15, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 12 May 2017 at 14:06, Daniel Krügler wrote:
>> Your description sounds remotely similar to me to the current problem
>> of __is_trivially_constructible intrinsic, which seems to instantiate
>> the copy constructor definition albeit it (IMO) s
On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
providing expected
On May 8, 2017, at 7:49 AM, Steven Munroe wrote:
> Of course as part of this process we will port as many of the
> corresponding DejaGnu tests from gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/ to
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ as appropriate. So far the dg-do run
> tests only require minor source changes,
On 05/08/2017 11:37 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The -Wformat-overflow warning newly enhanced in GCC 8.0 to detect
reading past the end of the source sequence misinterprets the size
argument to stpncpy as a request to read that many bytes from the
source sequence, rather than the number of bytes to wr
On 05/03/2017 08:46 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 05/03/2017 04:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
FWIW, my fix for bug 79062 is only partial (it gets the pass
to run but the warnings are still not issued). I don't quite
understand what prevents the
On May 11, 2017, at 12:16 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> On 05/11/2017 01:50 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> Hi Nathan,
>>> On 05/08/2017 05:34 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
>> ^~
>> make: *** [Makefile:1102: objcp/objcp-lang.o] Error 1
>
> Having learnt
On 05/02/2017 01:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
Currently the C/C++ frontends discard comments when parsing.
It's possible to set up libcpp to capture comments as tokens,
by setting CPP_OPTION (pfile, discard_comments) to false),
and this can be enabled using the -C command line option (see
also -CC
Hello!
Attached patch adjusts RTX costs to ignore addition or subtraction of
a carry flag for ADC or SBB instruction. These operations are
essentially free.
2017-05-12 Uros Bizjak
PR target/80723
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_rtx_cost) [case PLUS]: Ignore the
cost of adding a carry f
On Fri, 2017-05-12 at 11:38 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On May 8, 2017, at 7:49 AM, Steven Munroe wrote:
> > Of course as part of this process we will port as many of the
> > corresponding DejaGnu tests from gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/ to
> > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ as appropriate. So
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>
Since the combine pass canonicalises shift-add insns using plus and
ashift (as opposed to plus and mult which it previously used to do), it
no longer creates *add_n or *sub_n insns, as the patterns match plus and
mult only. The outcome of this is that some opportunities to generate
add{1,2,3} and s
[ This patch depends on my previous patch that removes the fold call from
save_expr. ]
In the effort of reducing early folding, we should avoid calling c_fully_fold
blithely, except when needed for e.g. initializers. This is a teeny tiny step
down that path. This patch does away with c_save_ex
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:37:27PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> @@ -565,6 +564,25 @@ c_fully_fold_internal (tree expr, bool in_init, bool
> *maybe_const_operands,
>appropriate in any particular case. */
>gcc_unreachable ();
>
> +case SAVE_EXPR:
> + /* Make sure to fold
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 9:09 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Ma
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 Swedish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/sv.po
(This file, 'gcc-7.1.0.sv.po', has just
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Marek Polacek wrote:
> In the effort of reducing early folding, we should avoid calling c_fully_fold
> blithely, except when needed for e.g. initializers. This is a teeny tiny step
Note there are several reasons for early folding in the C front end: at
least (a) cases where
On 12/05/2017 12:38, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 11/05/17 22:03 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
_Safe_container _IsCxx11AllocatorAware template allocator is only
used if C++11 Abi is not used so I simplified it.
* include/debug/safe_container.h [_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI]
(_Safe_contain
When I was fixing PR target/68163, I noticed there was a wider problem, and
opened up PR 80510.
The problem is if the DImode, DFmode, and SFmode are allowed in Altivec
registers before ISA 3.0, and the compiler wants to do an offsettable store.
The compiler generates a move from an Altivec registe
Ping? I have posted revisions of the following in patch set:
05/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg01442.html
09/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg00348.html
11/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg00350.html
I have retested them on Linux x86-64 in
On 05/12/2017 03:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 05/11/2017 01:50 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
however, it breaks bootstrap with --enable-languages=obj-c++:
wierd, I thought --enable-languges=all enabled that (and I have seen objc
issues pop
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/01/2017 03:06 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> This seems fine to me. A testcase to add to the gcc.target testsuite would
> be useful, but I don't think it's strictly necessary.
Thanks for the review. It was 2 months since I posted it, so I
reteste
On 05/04/2017 08:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/01/2017 03:06 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
This is a proposed patch for the bug 79794 which I just submitted.
This isn't a regression, so this can wait for after the gcc 7 branch
if necessary.
The problem here is that a reg+offset MEM target is passed to
e
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
