Hi all,
I am trying to use define_split, but it seems to me that I don't
understand how it is used.
It says in the gccint.pdf (which I use as my tutorial (is there
anything better or more up to date?)) that the combiner only uses the
define_split if it doesn't find any define_insn to match. This i
On 10/22/2010 01:16 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
I already tried to fix this by introducing a different return-pattern, i.e. a
PARALLEL of return and bunch of clobbers of unused regs. That fixes this problem
but has many other disadvantages compared to a simple return.
What were this disadvantages?
Pa
Paolo Bonzini schrieb:
> On 10/27/2010 04:30 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
>> The first time it occurs in "exit block uses" is in pro/epilogue:
>>
>> peep2.c.193r.split2:;; exit block uses 2 [d2] 26 [SP] 27 [a11]
>> peep2.c.195r.pro_and_epilogue:;; exit block uses2 [d2] 15
>> [d15] 26 [SP
On 10/28/2010 12:24 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
Emitting a bunch of CLOBBERs in epilogue/sibcall_epilogue works also, at least
for the small example above. But using LOCAL_REGNO seems more natural to me and
that does not clutter RTL.
True. It's a pretty elegant solution, and I missed it in my mail (I
Paolo Bonzini schrieb:
> On 10/22/2010 01:16 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
>> I already tried to fix this by introducing a different return-pattern,
>> i.e. a
>> PARALLEL of return and bunch of clobbers of unused regs. That fixes
>> this problem
>> but has many other disadvantages compared to a simple retur
Georg Lay schrieb:
> This code is not nice.
>
> ;; d8 = d4 * d6
> ;; d8 = d2
> ;; d2 = d8
> ;; return d2
this should be
;; d2 = d4 * d6
;; d8 = d2
;; d2 = d8
;; return d2
Georg
This Ada 2012 amendment titled "Calling Unchecked Deallocation is
illegal for zero-sized pools" has been implemented in GCC 4.6.0 recently
(ada/sem_intr.adb). However, the restriction is enforced even when
-gnat2005 (or -gnat95) switched are explicitly passed to gcc.
Shouldn't this check onl
On 10/28/2010 9:37 AM, John Marino wrote:
This Ada 2012 amendment titled "Calling Unchecked Deallocation is
illegal for zero-sized pools" has been implemented in GCC 4.6.0 recently
(ada/sem_intr.adb). However, the restriction is enforced even when
-gnat2005 (or -gnat95) switched are explicitl
Thanks for the explanation, Robert.
To be clear, it's code maintained by Adacore that has run afoul of the
change. I don't believe gprbuild is part of Adacore's public
repository, so I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to obtain a version
of gprbuild that will compile with GCC 4.6.0. This v
Hi,
I am doing a port in GCC 4.5.1. For the port
1. there is only (reg + offset) addressing mode only when reg is SP.
Other base registers are not allowed
2. FP cannot be used as a base register. (FP based addressing is done
by copying it into a base register)
In order to take advantage of FP el
> To be clear, it's code maintained by Adacore that has run afoul of the
> change. I don't believe gprbuild is part of Adacore's public repository,
> so I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to obtain a version of gprbuild that
> will compile with GCC 4.6.0. This version was released with GNAT GPL
On 10/28/2010 03:10 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
Georg Lay schrieb:
This code is not nice.
;; d8 = d4 * d6
;; d8 = d2
;; d2 = d8
;; return d2
this should be
;; d2 = d4 * d6
;; d8 = d2
;; d2 = d8
;; return d2
It seems to me that some of your peepholes should instead be implemented
using constrain
The important part of the log is:
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/Users/regress/tbox/native/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/Users/regress/tbox/native/build/./gcc/
-B/Users/regress/tbox/objs/powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0/bin/
-B/Users/regress/tbox/objs/powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0/lib/ -isystem
/Users/reg
On 10/29/2010 12:35 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
The important part of the log is:
/bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/Users/regress/tbox/native/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/Users/regress/tbox/native/build/./gcc/
-B/Users/regress/tbox/objs/powerpc-apple-darwin9.8.0/bin/
-B/Users/regress/tbox/objs/pow
Snapshot gcc-4.5-20101028 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.5-20101028/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
dear linux(or g++) user/programer with c++: my name is eric, when I use most
current g++ 4.3.3 on ubuntu to test 2 simple c++ programs, one have compiler
error,
// formore.cpp -- more looping with for
#include
using namespace std;
const int ArSize = 16; // example of exte
On 28 October 2010 23:41, eric lin wrote:
> you can see both programs, their for loop are very similar(or the same)
> for (int i=0
> but why first , and second programs can not compile
> but
> the third one is OK
> ?
This mailing list is for development of gcc, not help using it, please
send thes
One of my research projects for the past few months has been a
framework for writing GCC instrumentation plug-ins called InterAspect.
I am releasing the project today, and since there is a general
interest in plug-ins on this list, I wanted to send a quick
announcement with a pointer to the web sit
roy rosen writes:
> I am trying to use define_split, but it seems to me that I don't
> understand how it is used.
> It says in the gccint.pdf (which I use as my tutorial (is there
> anything better or more up to date?))
Assuming you built gccint.pdf from the gcc sources that you are using
for d
2010/10/29 Ian Lance Taylor :
> roy rosen writes:
>
>> I am trying to use define_split, but it seems to me that I don't
>> understand how it is used.
>> It says in the gccint.pdf (which I use as my tutorial (is there
>> anything better or more up to date?))
>
> Assuming you built gccint.pdf from t
On 29 October 2010 00:06, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Quoting Mohamed Shafi :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am doing a port in GCC 4.5.1. For the port
>>
>> 1. there is only (reg + offset) addressing mode only when reg is SP.
>> Other base registers are not allowed
>> 2. FP cannot be used as a base register. (FP b
Hi,
We are implementing a new context-sensitive algorithm for pointer
analysis in GCC-4.5.0.
Can anyone please suggest some good benchmarks for testing it ?
Thanks,
Swaroop.
22 matches
Mail list logo
