This is the varargs code, and I currently solved it by using
append_to_statement_list(), and then adding the resulting tree to the pre_p
and post_p using gimplify_and_add(). Is it OK?
Take a look at mainstream ports (x86, rs6000, etc) and use them as a model.
--
Eric Botcazou
the attached code (see contract__sparse) is a kernel which I hope gets
optimized well. Unfortunately, compiling (on opteron or core2) it as
gfortran -O3 -march=native -ffast-math -funroll-loops
-ffree-line-length-200 test.f90
./a.out
Sparse: time[s] 0.66804099
New: time[s]
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:28 AM, VandeVondele Joost vond...@pci.uzh.ch wrote:
the attached code (see contract__sparse) is a kernel which I hope gets
optimized well. Unfortunately, compiling (on opteron or core2) it as
gfortran -O3 -march=native -ffast-math -funroll-loops
thanks for the info
I think it is useful to have a bugzilla here.
will do.
I tested 4.4, what did you test?
4.3 4.4 4.5
Joost
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 11:29 AM, VandeVondele Joost vond...@pci.uzh.ch wrote:
thanks for the info
I think it is useful to have a bugzilla here.
will do.
Btw, complete unrolling is also hindred by the artificial limit of maximally
unrolling 16 iterations. Your inner loops iterate 27
I think it is useful to have a bugzilla here.
will do.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
Btw, complete unrolling is also hindred by the artificial limit of maximally
unrolling 16 iterations. Your inner loops iterate 27 times. Also by the
artificial limit of the maximal
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 11:41 AM, VandeVondele Joost vond...@pci.uzh.ch wrote:
I think it is useful to have a bugzilla here.
will do.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
Btw, complete unrolling is also hindred by the artificial limit of
maximally
unrolling 16 iterations.
On the LTO branch, I am brute-forcing LTO compilation on all the
testsuite directories. This causes many spurious failures because we
are not going to support LTO compiles on everything. For instance,
LTO is not supported for fortran, java, ada, mudflap. Also, for some
tests like pch, the tests
From: Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com
To: Jamie Prescott jpre...@yahoo.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 4:47:57 PM
Subject: Re: Extending constraints using register subclasses
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Jamie Prescott wrote:
Hi!
I wanted to add finer (one
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Jamie Prescott jpre...@yahoo.com wrote:
Now I managed to have the approach based on register subclasses working. The
above
works too, but I somehow found it less clear and more global than inline
assembly
constraints.
It is not global as the register
From: Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com
To: Jamie Prescott jpre...@yahoo.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 8:04:59 AM
Subject: Re: Extending constraints using register subclasses
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Jamie Prescott wrote:
Now I managed to have the approach
Hi Jack,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Jack Howarth wrote:
A couple changes in gcc 4.4.0 were omitted for
the darwin target. The gcc 4.4.0 release now supports
a full multilib build on the x86_64-apple-darwin9 and
x86_64-apple-darwin10 targets. The gfortran compiler
is now capable of generating
--- Comment #47 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 07:12 ---
Subject: Bug 39942
Author: jakub
Date: Sat May 16 07:12:02 2009
New Revision: 147607
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147607
Log:
PR target/39942
* final.c (label_to_max_skip):
Due to the change given below. Ada compiler under all platforms is no longer
able to build libraries. The path to TOOLS_TARGET_PAIRS is incorrect in
gnattools/Makefile.in resulting in the use of the dummy mlib-tgt-specific.adb
for all platforms.
--- Comment #1 from bechir dot zalila at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 07:42
---
Created an attachment (id=17881)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17881action=view)
A patchfile that fixes the problem
A patchfile that fixes the problem
--
--- Comment #2 from bechir dot zalila at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 07:43
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Created an attachment (id=17881)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17881action=view) [edit]
A patchfile that fixes the problem
It would be great to fix the problem
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from bechir dot zalila at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 08:15
---
Created an attachment (id=17882)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17882action=view)
A correctly formatted version of the patch
A correctly formatted version of the patch
--
bechir dot
In the following program, env%n should be equal to zero when entering the
routine titi but one gets the output :
10 0
5 10
instead of
10 0
5 0
as if the local variable env was declared save within titi. Notice that
the bug disappears if the allocatable array a is deleted in the
The testcase to be attached can be compiled with
gfortran -O3 -march=native -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ffree-line-length-200
test.f90
and as discussed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-05/msg00416.html
shows some limitations in optimization of gcc 4.3 4.4 and 4.5
--
Summary:
--- Comment #1 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 09:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=17883)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17883action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 09:54 ---
translating
buffer1 = 0.0_dp
to
(void) __builtin_memset ((void *) buffer1, 0, 648);
pessimizes the middle-end analysis because buffer1 is now addressable and
escapes. The maybe valid (if
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 10:04 ---
Like so:
Index: trans-expr.c
===
--- trans-expr.c(revision 147583)
+++ trans-expr.c(working copy)
@@ -4430,7 +4430,8 @@
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 10:25
---
Please post it to gcc-patches with an appropriate ChangeLog entry. Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39301
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 11:19 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Like so:
Index: trans-expr.c
===
--- trans-expr.c(revision 147583)
+++ trans-expr.c(working copy)
@@
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 11:20 ---
With that patch and
-O3 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -mfpmath=sse -msse2 --param
max-completely-peel-times=27 --param max-completely-peeled-insns=1500
--params for allow unrolling of all innermost loops I get
--- Comment #6 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 11:31 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
This looks somewhat different from what I get here.
trunk without patch:
vond...@pcihopt3:/data03/vondele/contract gfortran -O3 -march=native
-ffast-math -funroll-loops -ffree-line-length-200
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-05-16 11:39 ---
Subject: Re: missing
unrolling/scalarization/reassoc/free
On Sat, 16 May 2009, jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk wrote:
--- Comment #6 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 11:31 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
--- Comment #8 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 12:20 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Subject: Re: missing
unrolling/scalarization/reassoc/free
so, double good news.
First, the unrelated other testcase that speeds up by 30% does this thanks to
this patch only. This is a
Bootstrapping revision 147608 on powerpc-apple-darwin9 failed at stage2 with:
...
/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/darwin_buildw/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/bin/
-B/opt/gcc/gcc4.5w/powerpc-apple-darwin9/lib/
--- Comment #1 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-05-16 12:30 ---
Seen on sparc-linux too.
--
laurent at guerby dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #9 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-16 12:39 ---
BTW, the patch also applies to 4.4_branch and has the same positive effect...
pretty please ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
--- Comment #3 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2009-05-16
12:48 ---
a patch would be appreciated, even if it's not applied directly in the 4.4
branch.
Matthias
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40157
--- Comment #4 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 12:53
---
Subject: Bug 40153
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat May 16 12:53:22 2009
New Revision: 147613
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147613
Log:
PR target/40153
* arm.md
--- Comment #5 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 13:28
---
Subject: Bug 40153
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat May 16 13:28:27 2009
New Revision: 147614
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147614
Log:
PR target/40153
* arm.md
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 13:38
---
Yes, lets skip 4.3 and close this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 13:46
---
Nice for a one liner patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
--
rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 14:09 ---
Adding in the test case a line like
print *, f_array(1)%f(3.,5.)
produces a segfault in gfc_conv_scalarized_array_ref (trans-array.c, 2414).
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
#include stdint.h
#include stdio.h
uint8_t nibble(size_t addr) {
size_t byte_addr;
uint8_t bit;
__asm__(shr $1, %[addr]; setc %[bit]\n
: [addr] =rm (byte_addr), [bit] =rm (bit)
: [addr] (addr)
: cc);
uint8_t byte=((uint8_t *) byte_addr)[0];
byte = bit;
GNU Assembler support optimization options, but GCC does not pass -mtune and
-march options to assembler! For full optimization it's required to use this
twice:
# gcc ... -mtune=core2 -Wa,-mtune=core2
There is no default passing optimization options from GCC to AS. But many
programmers imply
--- Comment #13 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-05-16 14:37
---
Subject: Re: ICE in register_overhead, at bitmap.c:115
On May 13, 2009, at 9:32 PM, bje at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The test case does not run in a GB of RAM on my x86-64 system. It
sends the
system
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 14:45 ---
I can only assume ia64 too:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2009-05/msg00131.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 14:48
---
Part of this optimization could (should) be done in the middle-end see PR
36602.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
Revision 147596:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-05/msg00572.html
breaks bootstrap on ia64. A testcase:
[...@gnu-12 prev-gcc]$ cat /tmp/x.i
struct rtx_def;
typedef struct rtx_def *rtx;
extern int foo;
extern int bar;
extern int test (void);
extern int xxx;
int
test (void)
{
if (((rtx)
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 15:18 ---
*** Bug 40169 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 15:18 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40172 ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
Summary|[4.5 Regression] Revision |[4.5
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-05-16 15:31 ---
This has also been reported at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg00974.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40172
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:11
---
Subject: Bug 36031
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat May 16 16:11:11 2009
New Revision: 147615
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147615
Log:
PR fortran/36031
* decl.c
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:12
---
Probably fixed on trunk. Please reopen if not.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 16:12 ---
Here is a testcase for more problems:
[...@gnu-12 prev-gcc]$ cat /tmp/x.i
struct rtx_def;
typedef struct rtx_def *rtx;
extern int foo;
extern int bar;
extern int xxx;
int
test (void)
{
if (((rtx) 0 != (rtx)
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:15
---
Patch posted for the compile-time part of this PR:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg01013.html
Here are three testcases that should be handled when runtime checking is
performed:
$ cat a3.f90
--- Comment #4 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=17884)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17884action=view)
A candidate patch
I am testing this patch at the moment.
Could you please test it in your environment and tell me
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:36 ---
Subject: Bug 37577
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat May 16 16:36:22 2009
New Revision: 147618
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147618
Log:
2009-05-16 Thomas Koenig tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #5 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:39 ---
By the way, here what I think is happening.
During the parsing of
template
struct yvoid : public xvoid
{
typedef xvoid::type z;
};
We detect that xvoid::type is a use of a typedef that is a member of the
--- Comment #10 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 16:53
---
Subject: Bug 31243
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat May 16 16:53:02 2009
New Revision: 147619
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147619
Log:
PR fortran/31243
* resolve.c
--- Comment #11 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 17:00
---
Now, these very long strings are caught at compile-time when possible. We
should also add runtime checks, for non-constant lengths; three such examples
are given in comment #9.
Removing the wrong-code keyword:
Command line: g++ -pedantic -Wall -o test test.cpp
Compiler output: none
Basically, I created a class with two constructors. One of those is
trying to call the other one. The call doesn't seem to have any effect
at all.
The problem is: g++ allows such a thing with no warnings at all.
Apart
--- Comment #5 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 17:31 ---
Subject: Re: ARM -fshort-enums attribute not emitted
for Fortran
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 04:12:28PM -, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
Probably fixed on trunk. Please reopen if not.
Thanks! I
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 17:33 ---
The call doesn't seem to have any effect at all.
Yes it does, it creates another object and calls that constructor.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #20 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 17:33
---
Subject: Bug 33197
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat May 16 17:33:23 2009
New Revision: 147621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147621
Log:
PR fortran/33197
* intrinsic.c
--- Comment #6 from dougkwan at google dot com 2009-05-16 17:46 ---
Thanks for fixing this. I also submitted a patch yesterday with the same fix
and a test case also. The bug is fixed but I think we still want the test
case, right?
(In reply to comment #4)
Subject: Bug 40153
--- Comment #21 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 18:09
---
ERFC_SCALED compile-time simplification was committed.
TODO (carried on from above):
- TAN(X,Y) (= TAN2(X,Y))
- BESSEL_JN and BESSEL_YN: Transitional form is missing
- NORM2
- Finish complex (A)TAN(H),
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-16 18:38
---
Note, in the next C++ Standard, what the user wants will be possible, see,
e.g.:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1986.pdf
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40173
--- Comment #1 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 18:56 ---
ICE confirmed on 4.3.2.
On, trunk I get the following error message:
test.cc: In function int main():
test.cc:12: sorry, unimplemented: mangling template_id_expr
The input file with numbered line is:
1
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 20:31
---
I can reproduce it with 4.2.1, but it's fixed with 4.3.2, 4.4.0 and trunk.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 22:25
---
Subject: Bug 39501
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat May 16 22:24:59 2009
New Revision: 147623
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147623
Log:
PR target/39501
* arm.md (movsfcc):
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #14 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 22:42 ---
Subject: Bug 39301
Author: hjl
Date: Sat May 16 22:42:15 2009
New Revision: 147624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147624
Log:
2009-05-16 Brad Lucier luc...@math.purdue.edu
PR
--- Comment #7 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 23:04
---
Subject: Bug 40153
Author: rearnsha
Date: Sat May 16 23:04:06 2009
New Revision: 147626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147626
Log:
PR target/40153
* arm.md
--- Comment #8 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 23:06
---
(In reply to comment #6)
Thanks for fixing this. I also submitted a patch yesterday with the same fix
and a test case also. The bug is fixed but I think we still want the test
case, right?
Sorry, didn't see
--- Comment #15 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-05-17 01:09
---
Fixed by
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147624
--
lucier at math dot purdue dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-17 03:08 ---
Also breaks bootstrap on hppa.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-05-17 05:11 ---
the patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-05/msg00244.html
allows cp2k in its single source file form, 640klines as made available in
PR40005, to compile with -fwhole-file (using the ulimit -s unlimited
77 matches
Mail list logo
