°àâÕÜ ÈØÝÚÐàÞÒ writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have a project in mind which I'm going to propose to the GCC in terms of
> Google Summer of Code. My project is not on the list of project ideas
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SummerOfCode) that is why it would be very
> interesting
> for me to hear any opinions an
> Hi,
>
> I have run the testcase with the early inliner disabled and noticed
> that gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c XPASSes with early inlining and
> XFAILs without it. The reason for the (expected) failure is that
> IPA-CP removes a parameter which is constant (but also unused?). I
> reckon thi
On 3/29/2010 10:51 AM, Geert Bosch wrote:
On Mar 29, 2010, at 13:19, Jeroen Van Der Bossche wrote:
've recently written a program where taking the average of 2 floating
point numbers was a real bottleneck. I've looked into the assembly
generated by gcc -O3 and apparently gcc treats multipli
On Mar 29, 2010, at 13:19, Jeroen Van Der Bossche wrote:
> 've recently written a program where taking the average of 2 floating
> point numbers was a real bottleneck. I've looked into the assembly
> generated by gcc -O3 and apparently gcc treats multiplication and
> division by a hard-coded 2 li
On 03/30/2010 12:11 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/23/10 21:30, Jie Zhang wrote:
I'm fixing a bug. It's caused by uninitialized caller save pass data.
One function in the test case uses the "optimize" attribute with "O2"
option. So even with -O0 in command line, GCC calls caller save pass
for that fu
I've recently written a program where taking the average of 2 floating
point numbers was a real bottleneck. I've looked into the assembly
generated by gcc -O3 and apparently gcc treats multiplication and
division by a hard-coded 2 like any other multiplication with a
constant. I think, however, tha
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, Jack Howarth wrote:
>I've not seen any discussion of testing gcc trunk
> against the newer gmp 5.0 or 5.0.1 releases. Has anyone
> done significant testing with the newer gmp releases
> and are there any long term plans for bumping the
> required gmp (assuming that any of
I've not seen any discussion of testing gcc trunk
against the newer gmp 5.0 or 5.0.1 releases. Has anyone
done significant testing with the newer gmp releases
and are there any long term plans for bumping the
required gmp (assuming that any of the new features
or fixes are useful for gcc)? Thank
Hi,
I have run the testcase with the early inliner disabled and noticed
that gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c XPASSes with early inlining and
XFAILs without it. The reason for the (expected) failure is that
IPA-CP removes a parameter which is constant (but also unused?). I
reckon this is the reaso
On 03/23/10 21:30, Jie Zhang wrote:
I'm fixing a bug. It's caused by uninitialized caller save pass data.
One function in the test case uses the "optimize" attribute with "O2"
option. So even with -O0 in command line, GCC calls caller save pass
for that function. The problem is init_caller_save
Hi,
Many comments for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43560
are missing from gcc-bugs archive:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2010-03/
Is there a problem with gcc-bugs archive?
--
H.J.
[gcc-bugs@ removed from Cc:]
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, Alex Turjan wrote:
> Im writing to you regarding a possible bug in linear loop transfor.
> The bug can be reproduce by compiling the attached c file with gcc.4.5.0
> (20100204, 20100325) on x86 machine.
>
> The compiler flags that reproduce the
Im writing to you regarding a possible bug in linear loop transfor.
The bug can be reproduce by compiling the attached c file with gcc.4.5.0
(20100204, 20100325) on x86 machine.
The compiler flags that reproduce the error are:
-O2 -fno-inline -fno-tree-ch -ftree-loop-linear
If the compiler is ru
On 26 March 2010 07:54, Vaibhav Shrimali wrote:
> Hello,
> I made some changes in the compiler gcc-4.3.2 and am currently trying
> to build the compiler.
> There are no compilation error in the source code. I followed the
> steps specified at : http://gcc.gnu.org/install/index.html
> while configu
14 matches
Mail list logo
