-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/11/2011 08:59 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:04:34PM -0800, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jonathan Wakely
jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
Adding this to GCC seems like a total waste of time, write a
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, David Miller wrote:
While building libstdc++ I get an assertion failure in haifa-sched.c,
specifically the assertion on line 3437 is failing:
I haven't looked more deeply at it, but the first recent suspicious change
are the basic block handling changes Alan made two
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 2:56 AM, Theodore Papadopoulo
theodore.papadopo...@inria.fr wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/11/2011 08:59 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:04:34PM -0800, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jonathan Wakely
On 11/11/2011 10:53 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: David Millerda...@davemloft.net
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:41:23 -0500 (EST)
I haven't looked more deeply at it, but the first recent suspicious change
are the basic block handling changes Alan made two days ago:
2011-11-09 Alan
On 12 November 2011 08:56, Theodore Papadopoulo wrote:
Yes, the reason I'm delighted with auto is that there are cases
where I do not want to know the type (or I want to write generic
code that will work with different kinds of containers). For
std::multimapFoo,Bar amap;
when I write
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
Actually in our case (as you know) we have SCARY iterators, so
multimap::iterator is a typedef, and the actual type is
std::_Rb_tree_iteratorstd::pairconst Foo, Bar which is even less
useful to know!
Exactly. One
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Dominique Dhumieres domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
For the record, Jakub's comment on IRC:
with older gdb you simply had to find the stwcx
or whatever SC insn is, put a breakpoint after
it and continue instead of single stepping
I'm not familiar enough with gdb
While building libstdc++ I get an assertion failure in haifa-sched.c,
specifically the assertion on line 3437 is failing:
I am seeing no major problems on Sparc at all. What rev of GCC are you
referring to please?
Dennis
--
--
From: Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 12:51:18 -0500 (EST)
While building libstdc++ I get an assertion failure in haifa-sched.c,
specifically the assertion on line 3437 is failing:
I am seeing no major problems on Sparc at all. What rev of GCC are you
referring
From: Joel Sherrill joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 08:34:29 -0600
From my perspective, the head doesn't look so good. :(
I'm extremely disappointed with how the last 2 weeks have gone
as well. I can't work on any of the bugs I want to work on
because the tree keeps being
On 11/12/2011 04:25 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Joel Sherrilljoel.sherr...@oarcorp.com
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 08:34:29 -0600
From my perspective, the head doesn't look so good. :(
I'm extremely disappointed with how the last 2 weeks have gone
as well. I can't work on any of the bugs I
Snapshot gcc-4.7-2012 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7-2012/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.7 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #5 from Richard Lewis richalewis at gmail dot com 2011-11-12
08:33:13 UTC ---
I see... so suddenly from this year, building from a directory 1 level deeper
than the source distribution is unsupported even though this has been working
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #14 from Grygoriy Fuchedzhy grygoriy.fuchedzhy at gmail dot com
2011-11-12 10:09:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
I would say, the next step, is analyzing why: std::count seems a very simple
algorithm, no aliasing issues for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #15 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-12
11:12:36 UTC ---
Actually, patches do not belong to Bugzilla at all thus this issue should have
been posted and discussed only on the mailing list. In any case, we are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-12
12:11:48 UTC ---
By the way, without having investigated at all what the optimizers are actually
doing, in mainline, on an i7-980X I have here at hand I don't see the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-12
12:14:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 25804
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25804
Some numbers: i7-980X, mainline, -Ofast -funroll-loops, -march=native
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-11-12 12:21:27 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10 the test was failing for both -m32 and -m64 up to
revision 181046. From revision 181258 it fails only with -m64.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51105
Bug #: 51105
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.c-torture/execute/920501-1.c compilation, -O2
-flto -flto-partition=none
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-12
12:32:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 25805
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25805
Same, without -funroll-loops
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51078
--- Comment #19 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-11-12
12:34:51 UTC ---
All in all - again, without having analyzed in any detail the optimization
passes - I come to the conclusion that -funroll-loops is doing its job
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51093
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-11-12
13:12:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
I've downloaded gcc 4.4.3 tar-ball package.
Configured and build as follows for host-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu:
./configure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50822
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12
13:19:59 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Nov 12 13:19:55 2011
New Revision: 181311
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181311
Log:
PR bootstrap/50822
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51106
Bug #: 51106
Summary: [4.5 regression] ICE in move_insn, at
haifa-sched.c:2314
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47997
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47997
--- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12 14:05:03
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Sat Nov 12 14:04:58 2011
New Revision: 181314
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181314
Log:
gcc/objc:
Backport from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49248
Maciej Bliziński maciej at opencsw dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maciej at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45233
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12 14:12:31
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Sat Nov 12 14:12:26 2011
New Revision: 181315
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181315
Log:
gcc:
PR target/45233
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45233
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45233
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12 14:14:46
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Sat Nov 12 14:14:43 2011
New Revision: 181316
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181316
Log:
gcc:
PR target/45233
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51059
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12 14:30:52
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Sat Nov 12 14:30:45 2011
New Revision: 181317
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181317
Log:
gcc/testsuite:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51059
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #7 from Richard Lewis richalewis at gmail dot com 2011-11-12
14:51:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 25807
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25807
libgfortran build log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51083
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12
15:57:07 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Nov 12 15:57:03 2011
New Revision: 181321
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181321
Log:
PR libstdc++/51083
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51083
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50904
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-11-12 16:52:37 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 02:51:32PM +, richalewis at gmail dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #9 from Richard Lewis richalewis at gmail dot com 2011-11-12
17:22:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 02:51:32PM +, richalewis at gmail dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #10 from Richard Lewis richalewis at gmail dot com 2011-11-12
17:25:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 25808
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25808
gcc-4.6.2/x86_64-apple-darwin11.2.0/libgfortran/config.log
Builds to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-11-12 17:29:38 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 05:22:42PM +, richalewis at gmail dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #12 from Richard Lewis richalewis at gmail dot com 2011-11-12
17:53:39 UTC ---
This is what I originally did:
1. tar xvjf gcc-4.6.2.tar.bz
2. mkdir build
3. ../gcc-4.6.2/configure
4. make -j 8
Doesn't matter where I build it from,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51107
Bug #: 51107
Summary: [C++11] Accepts invalid literal operator with void
argument list.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
--- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-11-12 17:58:18 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 05:53:39PM +, richalewis at gmail dot com wrote:
This is what I originally did:
1. tar xvjf gcc-4.6.2.tar.bz
2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51108
Bug #: 51108
Summary: g++ segfault
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51107
--- Comment #1 from Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2011-11-12
19:10:38 UTC ---
As I was testing a patch that turned out to be totally bogus, it looked like
maybe processing_template_decl is false when processing a template
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51109
Bug #: 51109
Summary: bdver1 scheduler state machine too large
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51107
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at redhat dot com 2011-11-12 20:54:02
UTC ---
On 11/12/2011 02:10 PM, 3dw4rd at verizon dot net wrote:
But is there a test for when you're looking at a template specialization?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51110
Bug #: 51110
Summary: Intel pentium G9650 (core i5) identified as core i7
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
Bug #: 5
Summary: Optimization bug with array
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51094
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12
21:40:03 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Nov 12 21:39:59 2011
New Revision: 181326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181326
Log:
PR bootstrap/51094
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51094
--- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12
21:40:10 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Nov 12 21:40:07 2011
New Revision: 181327
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181327
Log:
PR bootstrap/51094
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51094
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12
21:44:17 UTC ---
As you can see, I applied the stpcpy patch and the change to define/use
STRING_ASM_OP. I don't have a strong opinion about which way to go with the
macro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38312
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50642
--- Comment #6 from Jon Grant jg at jguk dot org 2011-11-12 22:15:36 UTC ---
Could this be followed up with the proposed change implemented?
pre.smallexample { font-size:normal }
Thanks, Jon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38312
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-11-12 22:41:06 UTC ---
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:03:49PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-12 22:03:49 UTC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51112
Bug #: 51112
Summary: [4.7 Regression] LTO bootstrap failed with
bootstrap-profiled
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51113
Bug #: 51113
Summary: [4.7 regression] rev. 181105 causes Firefox
profiledbuild failure
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51114
Bug #: 51114
Summary: Got compiler error when creating a private subtype
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51103
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51060
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-13
00:44:43 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sun Nov 13 00:44:39 2011
New Revision: 181332
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181332
Log:
PR c++/51060
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51060
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51115
Bug #: 51115
Summary: -Wstrict-prototypes is rejected for C++ (ok) but
accepted for Ada (meaningless)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51095
Gerald Pfeifer gerald at pfeifer dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19563
Gerald Pfeifer gerald at pfeifer dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51116
Bug #: 51116
Summary: [4.7 Regression] configure: error: cannot compute
suffix of object files: cannot compile
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51116
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-13
04:19:34 UTC ---
Forgot to say, this was introduced in revision 181279.
-bash-3.2$ ./xgcc -B./ -v
Reading specs from ./specs
COLLECT_GCC=./xgcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51116
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-13
04:22:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 25812
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25812
Assembler file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51116
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com pinskia at gmail dot com
2011-11-13 04:32:06 UTC ---
According to another email mips is broken the same way.
Sent from my Palm Pre on ATamp;T
On Nov 12, 2011 20:18, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=986
--- Comment #32 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-13
05:09:43 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sun Nov 13 05:09:36 2011
New Revision: 181334
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181334
Log:
PR c++/986
* call.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51116
jimis jimis at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50372
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49084
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
Any ELF target that overrides ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL is at risk
of not building any more due to the recent elfos.h changes.
Those changes require that the label format generated by
ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL and TARGET_ASM_INTERNAL_LABEL are in sync,
but that is only being ensured for
2011/11/10 Jeff Law l...@redhat.com:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/09/11 14:09, Kai Tietz wrote:
Well, such a comparison-logic-folder helper - like affine-tree for
add/subtract/scale) - is for sure something good for inner gimple
passes building up new logic-truth
Hi,
my reorg of wekarefs broke solaris bootstrap. The problem is that C++ FE
produces
aliases for external variables/functions and expect them to be always thrown
away.
I think this was originally an oversight, since they are completely useless for
rest of compilation but with new alias
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 1:46 AM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
The first patch removes two avoidable warnings in rs6000.md.
It seems like we could avoid many more of the remaining, but
those are harder; this one was obvious.
The second patch is a build error. It has appeared on
OK'd by Mike in the PR thread.
Applied to trunk and 4.6
Iain
gcc:
PR target/45233
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_legitimize_reload_address):
Only expand a symbol ref. into an access when the entity is defined
in the TU.
PR bootstrap/50822
Index:
On 11/12/2011 03:57 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
And ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL uses stpcpy, which isn't portable.
We just need to declare it in system.h in order to use the definition in
libiberty.
Jason
This allows __promote to be used like enable_if to constrain the TR1
and C++11 maths function overloads so they only work for floating
point and integral types.
PR libstdc++/51083
* include/ext/type_traits.h (__promote): Only define __type member
for integral and floating
May I repeat my question re. 4.6?
Since this is a wrong-code situation, I would have thought it eligible for
a back-port?
Well, it's not a wrong-code as in wrong code generated by the back-end,
and it's not a regression.
In any case, backporting to 4.6 is fine with me.
Arno
Hi
I'm undecided whether this counts as a regression or not and if it
should be applied to the 4.6 branch - the testcases worked before TR1
was added or without -std=c++0x.
Thanks a lot for fixing this! About the branch, the patch seems safe enough to
me, maybe just wait a couple if weeks?
On 12 November 2011 16:24, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi
I'm undecided whether this counts as a regression or not and if it
should be applied to the 4.6 branch - the testcases worked before TR1
was added or without -std=c++0x.
Thanks a lot for fixing this! About the branch, the patch seems safe
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Venkataramanan Kumar
venkataramanan.kumar@gmail.com wrote:
Can you please check if these changes as Ok.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hello!
This patch defines -march=bdver1 and -mtune=bdver1 flag for the
On 11/12/2011 07:56 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/11/2011 07:39 PM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
It seems that expand_builtin sets target variable to
const0_trx when ignore argument is set and this causes
the above ICE. I'm trying a patch ...
I think the fix belongs in
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:19 AM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
The current x32 implementation uses LEAs to convert 32bit address to
64bit. However, we can use addr32 prefix to use 32bit address directly.
It improves performance by 5% in SPEC CPU 2K/2006. All changes are done
in x86
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, venkataramanan.ku...@amd.com wrote:
Added bdver1 information to changes.html for GCC4.6
is Ok to commit?
Looks good to me, yes.
Thanks,
Gerald
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
@@ -136,3 +136,6 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
/* Linux always uses gas. */
#undef TARGET_GAS
#define TARGET_GAS 1
+
+#undef TARGET_SYNC_LIBCALL
+#define TARGET_SYNC_LIBCALL 1
John, Richard, while you are at it, mind
From: Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:57:04 +0100
Eric, it seems that most if not all of the other ELF sparc targets
will need something like this as well but I was only able to validate
Linux at the moment.
Aren't all ELF targets of all architectures
Benjamin maintains the libstdc++ manuals under /onlinedocs on
gcc.gnu.org, but we keep running into permissions problems.
The patch below addresses this such that he, and others in the
gcc group with login access, can take care of such changes.
Unless there are any objections, I am planning on
Again, only those ELF targets which have an override for
ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL, which if you check is almost entirely
Sparc.
We probably aren't looking at the same tree then. Alpha, IA-64, MIPS, HP-PA,
SPARC and a few others have an override for ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL.
The
From: Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 00:26:51 +0100
Again, only those ELF targets which have an override for
ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL, which if you check is almost entirely
Sparc.
We probably aren't looking at the same tree then. Alpha, IA-64, MIPS, HP-PA,
Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
I think the fix belongs in expand_builtin_compare_and_swap.
I'm testing the following.
Full test completed on x86_64-linux. I verified that the test
you mentioned no longer ICEs on sh4-linux.
Committed.
Thanks!
Regards,
kaz
Now that we have a way of explicitly marking a variable as dead, we can
use that to indicate the end of a temporary's lifetime by adding it as a
cleanup for that temporary. Since gimple_push_cleanup still deals in
trees I needed to tweak a couple of places to avoid trying to treat a
clobber
My recent work on fixing lifetime extension for temporaries bound to
references makes it trivial to add this warning.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
commit 1db25121594ff9405adeb5bd6892d72679bf2ba1
Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com
Date: Sat Nov 12 20:42:21 2011 -0500
96 matches
Mail list logo
