On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Bingfeng Mei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I found current modulo pipelining very inefficient for many loops. One reason
is primitive cross-iteration memory dependency analysis. The
add_inter_loop_mem_dep function in ddg.c just draws true dependency between
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 06:38, Steven Bosscher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wasn't there a GSoC project for this last year? And this year?
It'd be interesting to hear if anything came out of that...
Nothing came of that, unfortunately.
Diego.
Zhang Le wrote:
The other would be make sure the destination register is different from
source registers.
I have read some docs, but still not sure how to do it.
That's just an earlyclobber. Search for that.
Andrew.
Diego Novillo wrote:
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 06:38, Steven Bosscher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wasn't there a GSoC project for this last year? And this year?
It'd be interesting to hear if anything came out of that...
Nothing came of that, unfortunately.
There are two patches, actually. The
Hi, all,
First of all, a little background on loongson2e/2f integer insn.
This new set of insns has 3 operands. Like:
div.g d,s,t
This is a real machine insn, not a macro.
And it delivers the result very fast.
This is the user guide if you are interested in more details:
For anyone interested, LLVM 2.4 was just released:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-announce/2008-November/30.html
http://llvm.org/releases/2.4/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
It has a number of new features, but the most user visible one is that
it compiles about 30% faster than LLVM 2.3 at
So I think one of the possible solution would be to reverse the div.g and teq
insn.
And I think this is not hard to do, just modify mips_output_division()
function.
Also I think this is a better solution, since we can save a register.
Do you mean the modification like this?
+
+
+/* Used
--- Comment #2 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-11-09
08:20 ---
This a target bug (stdcall symbol name decorati0on on windows targets)
--
dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-11-09
08:24 ---
Patch at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00321.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38054
--- Comment #4 from d dot g dot gorbachev at gmail dot com 2008-11-09
11:30 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Ok, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38054
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 10:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=16639)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16639action=view)
gcc44-pr37323.patch
I guess the following patch should fix it. The question is if it doesn't break
other
on a dual core Athlon chip. I'm using the gcc-trunk
build:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/design/gfortran/production gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20081109 (experimental) [trunk revision 141714]
Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Thank you for your attention.
Norm Clerman
--- Comment #1 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 14:57 ---
Subject: bug 38065 (my bug5)
Attached is the file you will need to reproduce the problem.
Thanks again for your assistance.
Norm Clerman
--- Comment #2 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 14:57 ---
Hello everyone,
I have created a small example to reproduce another bug I have found when I
attempt to build my lens design program. I will upload a file to you,
bug6M.tgz, as soon as I am assigned a bug number.
The bug occurs in file bug6M.f90:
bug6M.f90:17.21:
CALL GetNullSet
--- Comment #1 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 15:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=16641)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16641action=view)
see bug explanation
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38066
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-11-09
16:28 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] __builtin_apply failures
I guess the following patch should fix it. The question is if it doesn't
break
other targets...
I'll give it a try. If this fixes the
--- Comment #3 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2008-11-09 17:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Created an attachment (id=16640)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16640action=view) [edit]
the shell script seems to have a few lines referring to your home, but it looks
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2008-11-09
17:28 ---
Patch posted to gcc-patches...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00328.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38008
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 18:18
---
After doing some more testing and comparing g77 vs gfortran, gfortran actually
provides higher resolution 1000 ticks/sec then g77 100 ticks/second on at least
my platform (x86-64-linux) On Cygwin, results are
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from clerman at fuse dot net 2008-11-09 21:54 ---
Subject: Re: bug5
Thank you for your prompt reply. I have reassembled all the files to reproduce
the problem and they are in the attached file bug5a.tgz.
My apologies for any problem this has caused.
Norm Clerman
Hello,
I am a bit surprised that GCC (Ubuntu 4.3.2-1ubuntu11) 4.3.2 picks the
char* operator rather than the const char* one in the code attached...
I thought I'd report it in case someone case explain it to me, or in
case it might be a bug.
Thanks an regards,
Hervé
#include iostream
#include
--- Comment #7 from michael dot a dot richmond at nasa dot gov 2008-11-10
00:09 ---
I get a compile-time error:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat sort1.f90
PROGRAM sort1
INTEGER Count(1) !Current value of system clock
CALL Random_Seed(Put=Count)
END PROGRAM sort1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
--- Comment #7 from samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org 2008-11-09
23:50 ---
libiberty actually already has its own powerful getpwd () Attaching patches
currently fails, I'll try to submit later if I remember (else remind me).
--
samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org
--- Comment #8 from samuel dot thibault at ens-lyon dot org 2008-11-09
23:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=16643)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16643action=view)
better patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21706
.)
This is, of course, fixed (GNU Fortran (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081109). What do
you want to do with 4.3?? If I remove the offedning part of
gfc_get_parentheses in 4.3.3 20081108 (prerelease), it bootstrap and regtests
OK. Further, this bug is gone:-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-10 03:16
---
If you check, the minimum size of count is 8 as returned by the size= argument
if you use it. Try this. size is intent OUT.
PROGRAM sort1
INTEGER Count(1) !Current value of system clock
integer Size
CALL
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 17:41 ---
Subject: Bug 37836
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 9 17:40:30 2008
New Revision: 141717
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141717
Log:
2008-11-09 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2008-11-09
21:12 ---
Patch posted to gcc-patches...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00333.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38010
--- Comment #7 from suckfish at ihug dot co dot nz 2008-11-10 07:44 ---
Could someone commit the patch?
[http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00147.html] I don't have SVN
commit access.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37809
30 matches
Mail list logo
