Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
On 11/12/2013, at 3:45 pm, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> On 11/12/2013, at 11:14 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov >>> wrote: On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrish

Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > On 11/12/2013, at 11:14 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>> On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan >>> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos

Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
On 11/12/2013, at 11:14 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos wrote: Hi, Near the start of schedule_block, find_

Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Near the start of schedule_block, find_modifiable_mems is called if >>> DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES is not enabl

Re: Dependency confusion in sched-deps

2013-12-10 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
On 6/12/2013, at 9:44 pm, shmeel gutl wrote: > On 06-Dec-13 01:34 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> On 6/12/2013, at 8:44 am, shmeel gutl wrote: >> >>> On 05-Dec-13 02:39 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: Dependency type plays a role for estimating costs and latencies between instructions (which

Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Near the start of schedule_block, find_modifiable_mems is called if >> DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES is not enabled for this scheduling pass. It seems on >> c6x backend currentl

Re: Issues with GCSE pre step and double hard registers

2013-12-10 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote: > Hi, > > Our ARC processor has a multiplication operation that returns a 64 bit result > into a fixed register pair named like this: > > mlo:DI=zero_extend(r159:SI)*sign_extend(r181:SI) > > The GCSE rtl pre step has some difficulties to

Re: proposal to make SIZE_TYPE more flexible

2013-12-10 Thread DJ Delorie
> (For the types you do have, there's a need to define C++ name mangling. I mentioned this before, and I don't have a good solution for it. Both C++ and LTO need a mangled form of __intN types.

Re: proposal to make SIZE_TYPE more flexible

2013-12-10 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote: > > This seems mostly plausible, though I don't see anything to ensure that > > __intN does not exist at all if the size matches one of the standard C > > types, > > My thought here was that, since each __intN is specified by the > target, they'd know to o

Re: proposal to make SIZE_TYPE more flexible

2013-12-10 Thread DJ Delorie
> This seems mostly plausible, though I don't see anything to ensure that > __intN does not exist at all if the size matches one of the standard C > types, My thought here was that, since each __intN is specified by the target, they'd know to only do so if it doesn't match an existing (for that

RE: cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL

2013-12-10 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, BELBACHIR Selim wrote: > The selector 'target c++98' (in { dg-error "std=" "std" { target c++98 } > } for example) do not prevent the FAIL to be printed when -std=c++11 > options is used. Well, that would be a bug in one of (a) the test harness code, (b) the way the select

RE: cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL

2013-12-10 Thread BELBACHIR Selim
I have exactly the same behaviour than my native linux compiler. I don't understand why DejaGnu exp files print such FAIL. 3 errors has to be printed when using -std=c++98 and 0 errors has to be printed when using -std=c++11. That's what my compiler does. The selector 'target c++98' (in { dg-er

Re: cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL

2013-12-10 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, BELBACHIR Selim wrote: > FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 std (test for errors, line 3) > FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 auto (test for errors, line 3) > FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 no type (test for errors, line 3) That means that the desired result

Re: proposal to make SIZE_TYPE more flexible

2013-12-10 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote: > First pass at actual code. I took the path of using a new macro in > TARGET-modes.def and having genmodes build the relevent tables. Part > of the table is created by genmodes, the rest is created at runtime. This seems mostly plausible, though I don't se

Re: break in statement expression in while condition fails to compile

2013-12-10 Thread Florian Weimer
On 12/10/2013 02:21 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: The following code fails to compile with gcc-4.8.2. int main(void) { while ( ({ break; 0; }) ) ; return 0; } foo.c:3:14: error: break statement not within loop or switch while ( ({ break; 0; }) ) ^ Is this

Re: DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES bitmask for scheduling

2013-12-10 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos wrote: > Hi, > > Near the start of schedule_block, find_modifiable_mems is called if > DONT_BREAK_DEPENDENCIES is not enabled for this scheduling pass. It seems on > c6x backend currently uses this. > However, it's quite strange that this is not a requ

cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL

2013-12-10 Thread BELBACHIR Selim
Hi, I'm playing c++ testsuite on my gcc.4.7.3 port and I encounter the following result on test auto27.C PASS: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++98 std (test for errors, line 3) PASS: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++98 auto (test for errors, line 3) PASS: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++98 no type (test

Re: Unoptimal code.

2013-12-10 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Umesh Kalappa wrote: > Hi All, > > Below is the patterns defined for the mov and add instruction > . > [(set (match_operand:HI 0 "general_mov_operand" "=r,rRA") > (match_operand:HI 1 "general_mov_operand" "rRAi,ri"))] > "" > { > > } >

Issues with GCSE pre step and double hard registers

2013-12-10 Thread Claudiu Zissulescu
Hi, Our ARC processor has a multiplication operation that returns a 64 bit result into a fixed register pair named like this: mlo:DI=zero_extend(r159:SI)*sign_extend(r181:SI) The GCSE rtl pre step has some difficulties to handle hard register pair information. To exemplify my problem please s

Unoptimal code.

2013-12-10 Thread Umesh Kalappa
Hi All, Below is the patterns defined for the mov and add instruction . [(set (match_operand:HI 0 "general_mov_operand" "=r,rRA") (match_operand:HI 1 "general_mov_operand" "rRAi,ri"))] "" { } ) (define_insn "addhi3" [(set (match_operand:HI 0 "register_operand" "=A

break in statement expression in while condition fails to compile

2013-12-10 Thread Prathamesh Kulkarni
The following code fails to compile with gcc-4.8.2. int main(void) { while ( ({ break; 0; }) ) ; return 0; } foo.c:3:14: error: break statement not within loop or switch while ( ({ break; 0; }) ) ^ Is this a compile-error or is it a bug in GCC ? clang-3.2 seems to

Re: No git tag for GCC 4.8.2

2013-12-10 Thread Andreas Schwab
"H.J. Lu" writes: > There are git tags for GCC 4.8.0 and 4.8.1. But git tag > for GCC 4.8.2 is missing. Fixed. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different."