On 27 September 2023 06:46:29 CEST, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>On 27 September 2023 06:43:24 CEST, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>Hi!
>>
>>While looking into vec.h, I've noticed we still have a workaround for
>>GCC 4.1-4.3 bugs.
>
>
>This is https://gcc.
On 16 July 2018 21:38:36 CEST, Michael Ploujnikov
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>+clone_fn_ids = hash_map::create_ggc
>(1000);
Isn't 1000 a bit excessive? What about 64 or thereabouts?
thanks,
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:16:18 +0530
Ajit Agarwal wrote:
> Hello All:
>
> Addressed below review comments in the version 11 of the patch.
> Please review and please let me know if its ok for trunk.
s/satisified/satisfied/
> > As said, I don't see why the below was not cleaned up before the V1
>
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 16:41:07 +0530
Ajit Agarwal wrote:
> On 25/10/23 2:19 am, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > On 10/24/23 13:36, rep.dot@gmail.com wrote:
> >> As said, I don't see why the below was not cleaned up before the V1
> >> submission.
> >> Iff it breaks when manually CSEing, I
[CCing Ian as libgcc maintainer]
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:14:37 +
"Zhu, Lipeng" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Lipeng,
> > >
> > > >>> Sure, as your comments, in the patch V6, I added 3 test cases with
> > > >>> OpenMP to test different cases in concurrency respectively:
> > > >>> 1. find and create u
On 23 October 2019 13:16:19 CEST, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>+++ gcc/config/gcn/gcn.c 2019-10-23 12:13:54.091122156 +0100
>@@ -3786,8 +3786,7 @@ gcn_expand_builtin (tree exp, rtx target
>a vector. */
>
> opt_machine_mode
>-gcn_vectorize_get_mask_mode (poly_uint64 ARG_UNUSED (nunits),
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:53:06 +1100
Kugan Vivekanandarajah wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 23:07, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > Did you try this with multiple assembler options? I see you stream
> > them as -Wa,-mfpu=xyz,-mthumb but then compare the whole
> > option strings so a mismatch with -W
On 28 October 2019 23:08:10 CET, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
>On 28/10/2019 21:52, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:53:06 +1100
>> Kugan Vivekanandarajah wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 23:07, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>>
>&g
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 14:55:37 +0100 (CET)
Richard Biener wrote:
> Index: gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
> ===
> --- gcc/tree-vect-loop.c (revision 277517)
> +++ gcc/tree-vect-loop.c (working copy)
> @@ -2690,6 +2689,20 @@ pop:
>
On 29 October 2019 10:36:47 CET, Richard Biener wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>
>Unfortunately it's not semantically equivalent ;) I could indeed
>break once cnt reaches 2 but not sure if it's worth the ugliness ;)
I managed to read cnt ==
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:38:27 +0100
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:49 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:23:20PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> > > The patch adds a new pass that identifies a series of if-elseif
> > > statements and transform then into a G
On 8 November 2019 17:57:51 CET, Martin Sebor wrote:
>On 11/6/19 2:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 11/6/19 1:39 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 11/6/19 1:27 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/6/19 11:55 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/6/19 11:00 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> The -Wstringop-overflow w
On 20 January 2020 15:55:23 CET, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>Using "implicit none" multiple times in a scoping unit is not permitted
>
>– and checked for.
>
>However, using one in the parent name space and re-confirming it in the
>
>current name space is permitted – but was before rejected.
+ if
tps://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87103#c7
>
>I'm happy to go ahead and commit this if Bernhard is ok with me doing
>so.
Please go ahead and push it.
Many thanks in advance and sorry for the delay!
thanks,
>
>-Andrew
>
>On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:00:36 PM PST Ber
On 5 December 2019 16:24:53 CET, "Martin Liška" wrote:
-/* Allocate new callgraph node. */
-
-inline cgraph_node *
-symbol_table::allocate_cgraph_symbol (void)
-{
- cgraph_node *node;
-
- node = ggc_cleared_alloc ();
- node->type = SYMTAB_FUNCTION;
- node->m_summary_id = -1;
- node->m_uid =
Hi!
installed as r14-9256
> diff --git a/contrib/mklog.py b/contrib/mklog.py
> index d764fb41f99..7d8d554b15e 100755
> --- a/contrib/mklog.py
> +++ b/contrib/mklog.py
> @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ def generate_changelog(data, no_functions=False,
> fill_pr_titles=False,
> # it used to be
Hi Joseph!
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 14:54:49 + (UTC)
Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc wrote:
>
> > * builtin-attrs.def (ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_RT_LIST): Use ATTR_NOTHROW_LIST
> > instead of ATTR_TM_NOTHROW_LIST, thus removi
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 12:43:53 +0100
arthur.co...@embecosm.com wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/rust/typecheck/rust-hir-type-check-implitem.h
> b/gcc/rust/typecheck/rust-hir-type-check-implitem.h
> index 067465ec77a..4d178440775 100644
> --- a/gcc/rust/typecheck/rust-hir-type-check-implitem.h
> +++ b/gcc/
On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:56:46 +
Evgeny Karpov wrote:
> A ChangeLog template using "Moved... ...here" has been generated by
> contrib/mklog.py.
> It seems that it needs modification.
>
> Regards,
> Evgeny
>
> -Original Message-
> Thursday, February 22, 2024 12:11 PM
> Richard Earnsha
On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 at 22:12, Mark Harmstone wrote:
> Also, there are relocation types needed for Windows programs that are
> supported in COFF but not in ELF object files.
>
Right, it's been a long time since i last dealt with PECOFF and i had
assumed that things might have changed in the meant
On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 at 20:17, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> Minor update for older and more recent changes.
>
> Comments?
Nit:
+OpenACC 3.2: The following API routines are now available in
+ Fortran using the openacc module or the
+ open_lib.h header file: acc_alloc,
s/open_lib.h/opena
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 21:29:06 -0800
Jerry D wrote:
> The attached patch adds the error checks similar to the first patch
> previously committed.
>
> I noticed a redundancy in some defines MSGLEN and IOMSG_LEN so I
> consolidated this to one define in io.h. This is just cleanup stuff.
>
> I hav
On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 23:24:22 +0100
Harald Anlauf wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h b/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
> index 82f388c05f8..88502c1e3f0 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
> @@ -2926,6 +2926,10 @@ gfc_dt;
> typedef struct gfc_forall_iterator
> {
Hi Kito!
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 17:06:09 +0800
Kito Cheng wrote:
> Try to list all supported extensions: name, version and few description
> for each extension.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * doc/invoke.texi (RISC-V Options): Add list of supported
> extensions.
> ---
> gcc/doc/invoke.texi
nges do not regress but
behave as intended. I did check that the memory leak in
gfc_find_derived_vtab is fixed with the patch.
Ok for stage 1 if the rebased regression test passes?
thanks
>
> Am 17.11.21 um 09:12 schrieb Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches:
> > On Tue, 16
[I was torn towards asking gcc@ only, individual i386 maintainers in
private or bluntly asking for help on gcc-patches or re-iterate through
ABI, so in an attempt to cut off years of latency i hereby ask all and
everybody for assistance. Stage4 means any chances are low, i know..
hence stage 1 mate
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 21:14:02 +0200
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> plonk.
ping^3
patch at
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20230526103151.3a7f6...@nbbrfq.loc/
I would regenerate it for rtx and/or tree, though, whatever you deem
desirable?
thanks
>
> On 26 May 2023 10:3
On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 16:31:39 -0400
Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 8/2/23 12:51, Patrick Palka via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 2:11 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi David, Patrick,
> >>
> >> On Thu, 1 Jun 2023
On 18 September 2023 12:19:17 CEST, Julian Brown
wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 17:13:02 +0200
>Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches
>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:28:28 -0700
>> Julian Brown wrote:
>>
>> > + static bool
>> >
Hi Maxim!
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 18:06:25 +0400
Maxim Kuvyrkov via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Jun 3, 2023, at 19:17, Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> > On 6/2/23 09:20, Maxim Kuvyrkov via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >> This patch adds tracking of current testsuite "tool" and "exp"
> >> to the processing of .sum fi
On 26 September 2023 18:46:11 CEST, Tobias Burnus
wrote:
>On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>> If the fall-through is deliberate please add a /* FALLTHROUGH */
>> comment (or whatever spelling disables the warning).
>
>It's: gcc_fallthrough ();
>
>Which gets converted to "__attribute__((fal
On 26 September 2023 23:02:10 CEST, "Andre Vieira (lists)"
wrote:
>
>
>On 26/09/2023 21:26, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On 26 September 2023 18:46:11 CEST, Tobias Burnus
>> wrote:
>>> On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>>>
On 27 September 2023 06:43:24 CEST, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>While looking into vec.h, I've noticed we still have a workaround for
>GCC 4.1-4.3 bugs.
This is https://gcc.gnu.org/PR105656
thanks,
>As we now use C++11 and thus need to be built by GCC 4.8 or later,
>I think this is now never u
On 23 August 2013 16:05:32 Zoran Jovanovic wrote:
Hello,
This is new patch version. Optimization does not use BIT_FIELD_REF any
more, instead it generates new COMPONENT_REF and FIELD_DECL.
Existing Bit field representative is associated with newly created field
declaration.
During analysis pha
On 30 August 2013 23:23:16 Teresa Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Teresa Johnson
wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Xinliang David Li
wrote:
>>> Except that in this form, the dump will be extremely large a
On 31 August 2013 19:15:46 Richard Biener wrote:
Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Hi,
>remember_with_vars walks trees that are read from file (now unique)
>and looks for fields that can contain pointers to vars or functions and
>if so, it records them to global hashtable for later fixup.
>This is quite wast
On 4 September 2013 00:17:00 Cong Hou wrote:
Could you please tell me how to check the precision of long double in
GCC on different platforms?
I did not follow your discussion but..
http://uclibc.org/~aldot/precision_check.f
Or something along those lines in your favourite language.
HTH..
Th
On 5 September 2013 13:02:29 Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Hello,
On 04 Sep 20:11, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> On 4/09/2013, at 7:43 PM, Alexander Ivchenko wrote:
> The patch is OK with definitions of OPTION_GLIBC, OPTION_UCLIBC and
OPTION_BIONIC copied verbatim from gcc/config/l
Checked into main trunk:
On 30 September 2013 14:19:01 Richard Biener wrote:
This fixes PR58554, pattern recognition in loop distribution now
needs to check whether all stmts are unconditionally executed.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2013-09-30 Richard Biener
Hi,
s/imlpies/implied/
Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
On 18 October 2012 17:30:20 Meador Inge wrote:
Ping ^ 2
Been a while but wasn't --with-build-sysroot for exactly this?
On 10/09/2012 09:44 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On 102012 03:45 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Currently the gcc-{ar,nm,ranlib} utilities assume that binutil
On 18 October 2013 22:55:39 Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 01:52:54PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2013, at 6:11 AM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> >>> Does this look ok? Kenny, can you double check the cases, think I
have them right, but? a double check would be good.
> >>
t delimiter" hunks in the manual patch, i'd suggest
to add -Wcomment as default flags where possible to catch these early on
in the future.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2013-10-12 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* lib/gcc-dg.exp (cleanup-ipa-dump, cleanup-rtl-dump,
clea
perform the pch check. Does
that make sense to you?
Regstrapped (together with the auto-removal patch just sent) on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with trunk@204119 without regressions.
Ok for trunk?
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2013-10-12 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* lib/dg-pch.exp (pch-init
On 30 October 2013 22:47, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2013, at 2:56 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>> - set result [check_compile pchtest object "int i;" "-x c-header"]
>> + set result [check_compile pchtest object "$chk_type"
On 31 October 2013 01:01, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2013, at 2:41 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>>> I've noticed that this testcase doesn't clean up after itself.
>
>> This was nagging me last weekend.. ;)
>> What about automating this?
&g
On 30 October 2013 23:22, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2013, at 3:14 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>> On 30 October 2013 22:47, Mike Stump wrote:
>>>
>>> Was there a significant purpose for the added C++ comment? If not, can you
>>> remove th
On January 27, 2016 8:20:47 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>This also fixes 3 minor issues Bernd spotted in the last round of
>changes.
Bernhard, not Bernd i suppose. Note that the !is_gimple_debug (stmt) should now
be redundant in the hunk below.
Thanks,
@@ -280,33 +280,19 @@ fsm_find_contro
On January 27, 2016 8:47:15 PM GMT+01:00, Mike Stump
wrote:
>On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:33 PM, Nguyễn Sinh Ngọc
> wrote:
>> I wonder that what paper is?
>> Is it an introduction about new feature in our target?
>
>I was not able to make any sense of these two question. Likely a
>language barrier. I
.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2015-12-27 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* gfortran.dg/spellcheck-operator.f90: New testcase.
* gfortran.dg/spellcheck-procedure_1.f90: New testcase.
* gfortran.dg/spellcheck-procedure_2.f90: New testcase.
* gfortran.dg/spellcheck-structu
On 27 November 2013 11:10, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 02:26:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 13.06.2013 11:42, schrieb Richard Sandiford:
>> > "Bernhard Reutner-Fischer" writes:
>> >> On 12 June 2013 20:20:50 Richard Sandif
On 8 December 2013 16:53, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>> Patch updated with two more tests to check if the vfmadd insn is being
>> produced when possible.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sri
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:39:11AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:34:41AM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> > The cleanup routine would currently run 7 regexes on the incoming
> > compiler-flags which is supposedly pretty fast.
> > But yes, we
On 8 November 2013 17:28, Bruce Korb wrote:
> Sure. Looks good to me. Thanks
pushed as r206146
thanks,
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>> On 4 April 2013 22:20, Bruce Korb wrote:
>>> Except as noted below, fine by me.
>>
On 13 November 2013 18:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13 November 2013 09:22, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On 11 November 2013 12:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> How does __UCLIBC_SUSV4_LEGACY__ get defined? We'd have a problem if
>>> users defined that
On 27 December 2013 12:28:29 "H.J. Lu" wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds Intel microarchitecture changes to GCC 4.9 changes.html.
OK to install?
Thanks.
--
H.J.
--
Index: changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.9/change
On 7 January 2014 00:57:47 Patrick Palka wrote:
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Patrick Palka writes:
>
>> From what I inferred from the make manual[0], $* is functionally
>> equivalent to $(basename $@) in this case.
>
> Or $(base), I think.
>
> Andreas.
>
> --
> Andr
stats are dumped once before
limit_scops() and once afterwards and now this is reflected in the dumps.
Ok for trunk if bootstrap+regtest pass?
Thanks,
gcc/ChangeLog
2015-07-09 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* graphite.h: New file.
(print_graphite_statistics): Extern d
gcc/ChangeLog
2015-07-09 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* ipa-icf.c (sem_item_optimizer::do_congruence_step): Fix typo
in dump message.
Ok for trunk if testing passes?
Hmz, that's obvious, will commit tomorrow after the regstrap during
night.
---
gcc/ipa-icf.c | 2 +-
1
On July 9, 2015 6:48:39 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 07/09/2015 10:30 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog
>>
>> 2015-07-09 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>>
>> * graphite.h: New file.
>
On 10 July 2015 at 08:51, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:46:08PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
[toupper/tolower patch withdrawn]
>> I don't think this can be correct for all locales which need not
ases, it would be nice to have at least a tiny bit for
x86_64, too.
PS: no -mbranch-cost and, a tad more seriously, no --param branch-cost either ;)
PPS: attached meant to illustrate comments above. Untested.
cheers,
From 1b7d8f9b61eb538cc4338e2073d04a66518f13c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bernh
On 11 July 2015 at 01:00, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On 10 July 2015 at 14:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> PS: no -mbranch-cost and, a tad more seriously, no --param branch-cost either
> ;)
err, arm and aarch64 have no -mbranch-cost, a couple of prominent
other arches do..
On July 13, 2015 11:45:55 AM GMT+02:00, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
>Hi Bernhard,
>
>> Did you include go in your testing?
>> I see:
>> Unexpected results in this build (new failures)
>> FAIL: encoding/json
>> FAIL: go/printer
>> FAIL: go/scanner
>> FAIL: html/template
>> FAIL: log
>> FAIL: net/http
>
In addition to Mike's "[PATCH] gcc: fix building w/isl-0.15" in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg01162.html
I seem to also need a couple of more includes for isl-0.15.0:
2015-07-15 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* graphite-blocking.c, graphite-dependences.c,
On 17 July 2015 at 06:32, Tobias Grosser wrote:
> On 07/17/2015 12:35 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2015-07-16 Aditya Kumar
>> Sebastian Pop
>>
>> * common.opt (floop-fuse): New.
>> * doc/invoke.texi (floop-fuse): Documented.
>>
On July 23, 2015 7:43:51 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 07/22/2015 09:29 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> While looking at PR c/16351, I noticed that all tests proposed for
>> -Wnull-attribute
>> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg01715.html) could be
>> warned from the FEs by simp
On July 24, 2015 7:30:03 AM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 07/23/2015 04:44 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On July 23, 2015 7:43:51 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law
>wrote:
>>> On 07/22/2015 09:29 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>>> While looking at PR c/16351,
On July 25, 2015 1:15:21 AM GMT+02:00, Trevor Saunders
wrote:
>
>Another case is
>
>Foo *
>bar()
>{
> #if SHOULD_USE_BAR
> ...
>#else
> return NULL;
>#endif
>}
>
>And somehow your program is setup so bar is only called when
>SHOULD_USE_BAR is defined. In that sort of case it may be convenien
On August 2, 2015 8:18:51 PM GMT+02:00, Patrick Palka
wrote:
No comment on the patch itself, but please
s/visted/visited/
s/VISIED_PHIS/VISITED_PHIS/
while at it.
TIA,
On September 15, 2015 7:39:39 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump
wrote:
>On Sep 14, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> Maybe GCC-6 can bump the required
>>> dejagnu version to allow for getting rid of all these superfluous
>>> load_gcc_lib? *blink* :)
>> I'd support that as a direction.
>>
>> Certainl
On September 15, 2015 10:05:27 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 09/15/2015 01:21 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 10:39 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>>> On Sep 14, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> Maybe GCC-6 can bump the required
> dejagnu version to allow for getting ri
On September 16, 2015 3:01:47 PM GMT+02:00, Matthias Klose
wrote:
>On 09/15/2015 09:23 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On September 15, 2015 7:39:39 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump
> wrote:
>>> On Sep 14, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>>> Maybe GCC-6
On September 16, 2015 7:57:03 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump
wrote:
>On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
>
>> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as
>part of the source tree?
>
>TL;DR: No.
>
>We
On September 16, 2015 7:39:42 PM GMT+02:00, David Malcolm
wrote:
>On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 10:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
>> >> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> M
On September 16, 2015 6:32:46 PM GMT+02:00, "Manuel López-Ibáñez"
wrote:
>On 16/09/15 16:36, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> On 09/16/15 10:23, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>> On 09/16/2015 08:02 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ else if (warn_multiple_inheritance)
+warning (OPT_Wmultiple_inherita
On September 23, 2015 3:00:51 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Biener
wrote:
>*** copy_reference_ops_from_ref (tree ref, v
>*** 816,826
>--- 828,846
> temp.op0 = TREE_OPERAND (ref, 1);
> if (tree_fits_shwi_p (TREE_OPERAND (ref, 1)))
> temp.off = tree_to_shwi
On September 25, 2015 7:59:07 PM GMT+02:00, Andi Kleen
wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:01:47AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 09/25/2015 10:58 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>> >Woops, we crossed wires. I just committed this patch. Would you like
>> >me to revert it?
>> Leave it. If Andi can include
On September 25, 2015 6:52:37 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 09/22/2015 03:26 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> This patch is essentially identical to v1 here:
>>https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg00729.html
>> The only change is in the ChangeLog, moving the libgo.exp
>> ChangeLog entr
On September 26, 2015 9:10:13 AM GMT+02:00, "Bin.Cheng"
wrote:
>On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal
> wrote:
>> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following impact on the
>performance
>> and code size.
>>
>> ratio with the optimization vs ratio without optimization fo
On September 27, 2015 5:13:59 PM GMT+02:00, Ajit Kumar Agarwal
wrote:
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
>Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2015 7:49 PM
>To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
>Cc: GCC Patches; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli
>H
On October 19, 2015 3:54:05 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Biener
wrote:
>
>+static bool
>+gimple_phi_nonnegative_warnv_p (gimple *stmt, bool *strict_overflow_p,
>+ int depth)
>+{
Shouldn't all such depth parms be unsigned short or at least unsigned int?
Thanks,
On October 23, 2015 2:24:26 PM GMT+02:00, Matthew Wahab
wrote:
>The ARMv8.1 architecture extension adds two Adv.SIMD instructions,.
>This
>patch adds support in Dejagnu for ARMv8.1 Adv.SIMD specifiers and
>checks.
>
>The new test options are
>- { dg-add-options arm_v8_1a_neon }: Add compiler opti
On October 29, 2015 8:18:22 PM GMT+01:00, Alan Lawrence
wrote:
>+
>+static tree
>+subst_constant_pool_initial (tree expr, tree var)
>+{
>+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == VAR_DECL)
Just a nit, but i thought we had VAR_DECL_P or VAR_P for the TREE_CODE (NODE)
== VAR_DECL predicate?
Thanks,
On May 28, 2015 2:03:08 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump wrote:
>On May 28, 2015, at 2:02 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>>
>> Does anybody have a better suggestion?
>>
>> directive not at the start of a loop at %C
>> directive not followed by a loop at %C
&g
On November 6, 2015 5:27:44 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
wrote:
>On 11/06/2015 04:52 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>
>>> opinion). If you want a half-finished redzone allocator, I can send
>you a
>>> patch.
>>
>> Yes please. Let's get it work.
>
>Here you go. This is incomplete and does not compile, b
On November 9, 2015 6:35:20 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
wrote:
>On 11/07/2015 03:44 PM, Kelvin Nilsen wrote:
>> +bool
>> +in_loop_p (basic_block block, struct loop *loop_ptr)
>> +{
>> + basic_block *bbs = get_loop_body (loop_ptr);
>> + bool result = false;
>> +
>> + for (unsigned int i = 0; i
On November 10, 2015 1:02:57 PM GMT+01:00, Richard Biener
wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Kumar, Venkataramanan
> wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> I have now implemented storing of DR and references using hash maps.
>> Please find attached patch.
>>
>> As discussed, I am now storing the ref,
On November 18, 2015 9:30:23 AM GMT+01:00, Richard Biener
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
>> On 17/11/15 16:18, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > > > IMHO autopar needs to handle induction itself.
>> > > >
>> > > >I'm not sure what you mean. Could you elaborate? Autopar
>handles
>> >
On November 24, 2015 7:23:40 AM GMT+01:00, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Hi,
Doc talks about COMMON, parm is COMMON_OR_EXTERN.
> static int
>-warn_type_compatibility_p (tree prevailing_type, tree type)
>+warn_type_compatibility_p (tree prevailing_type, tree type,
>+ bool common_or_
On November 24, 2015 8:29:10 PM GMT+01:00, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>On November 24, 2015 7:23:40 AM GMT+01:00, Jan Hubicka
>wrote:
>>Hi,
>
>Doc talks about COMMON, parm is COMMON_OR_EXTERN.
>
>> static int
>>-warn_type_compatibility_p
On November 24, 2015 10:59:01 AM GMT+01:00, Richard Biener
wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Hi,
>> while looking into the earlier bug I noticed that type_hash_canon is
>used to
>> avoid producing type duplicates. The type is however created, then
>looked up
>> in t
On November 25, 2015 3:33:47 PM GMT+01:00, Cesar Philippidis
wrote:
>On 10/20/2015 02:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:15:24PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>>> diff --git gcc/fortran/scanner.c gcc/fortran/scanner.c
>>> index bfb7d45..1e1ea84 100644
>>> --- gcc/fortran/sc
/ChangeLog
2015-11-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* interface.c (check_sym_interfaces, check_uop_interfaces,
gfc_check_interfaces): Base interface_name buffer off
GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN.
Signed-off-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
---
gcc/fortran/interface.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed
Regstrapped without regressions, ok for trunk stage3 now / next stage1?
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
2015-11-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* trans-types.c (gfc_typenode_for_spec): Commentary typo fix.
Signed-off-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
---
gcc/fortran/trans-types.c | 2 +-
1 file
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
2015-11-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* gfortran.h (gfc_lookup_function_fuzzy): New declaration.
* resolve.c: Include spellcheck.h.
(lookup_function_fuzzy_find_candidates): New static function.
(lookup_uop_fuzzy_find_candidates): Likewise
A couple of places used gfc_add_component_ref(expr, "string") instead of
the defines from gfortran.h
Regstrapped without regressions, ok for trunk stage3 now / next stage1?
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
2015-11-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
* class.c (gfc_add_class_array_
On 1 December 2015 at 16:01, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 01:55:01PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>
>> David Malcolm nice Levenshtein distance spelling check helpers
>> were used in some parts of other frontends. This proposed patch adds
>> s
On 1 December 2015 at 15:52, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>> These three function used a hardcoded buffer of 100 but would be better
>> off to base off GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN which denotes the maximum length of a
>
On 1 December 2015 at 17:41, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:12:57PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On 1 December 2015 at 16:01, Steve Kargl
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 01:55:01PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>&g
1 - 100 of 900 matches
Mail list logo
