Hi all,
I'm a graduating Physics student from Italy. I'm actually working on
accelerators devices like GPU and Intel MIC, with a focus on OpenACC
api.
I'm very interested to OpenACC support in GCC, I know that there is a
branch that contains a basic implementation for it.
How can I build gcc
On Friday 25 April 2014 11:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On April 25, 2014 5:54:09 PM CEST, Swati Rathi swatira...@cse.iitb.ac.in
wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to print points-to information for SSA variables as below.
for (i = 1; i num_ssa_names; i++)
{
tree ptr = ssa_name (i);
On 04/25/2014 07:48 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 08:23:22PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On 04/25/2014 03:14 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
Could you therefore please re-categorize this as devirt bug.
It is an IPA bug. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60965
Now when
On April 26, 2014 12:31:34 PM CEST, Swati Rathi swatira...@cse.iitb.ac.in
wrote:
On Friday 25 April 2014 11:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On April 25, 2014 5:54:09 PM CEST, Swati Rathi
swatira...@cse.iitb.ac.in wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to print points-to information for SSA variables as
Snapshot gcc-4.7-20140426 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7-20140426/
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/branches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60971
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60968
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Starke daniel.f.starke at freenet dot de ---
I was able to locate the problem. The SIGSEG only occures when bootstrapping
GCC with -fomit-frame-pointer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40073
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60973
Bug ID: 60973
Summary: Invalid propagation of a tail call in copyrename2 pass
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60974
Bug ID: 60974
Summary: bfdio.c:580:30: error: argument to ‘sizeof’ in
‘memset’ call is the same expression as the
destination; did you mean to dereference it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60974
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60974
--- Comment #2 from atvreddy atvreddy97 at gmail dot com ---
thank you so much..!,i will try with new gdb version. thanks for
support..
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:30 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60971
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60975
Bug ID: 60975
Summary: a
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
Assignee: unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60975
Prathamesh bilbotheelffriend at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60975
Prathamesh bilbotheelffriend at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60975
--- Comment #2 from Prathamesh bilbotheelffriend at gmail dot com ---
Hi,
Consider the following test-case:
#define FOO(a...)
When compiled with: gcc -E -Wpedantic
the following warning gets printed:
empty-arg.c:1:14: warning: ISO C does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
Bug ID: 60976
Summary: Compilation with G++ 4.9.0 is 2-3 times slower than
with 4.8.2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
--- Comment #1 from Chernyshev Viacheslav astellar at ro dot ru ---
Created attachment 32687
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32687action=edit
g++ -v output for 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
--- Comment #2 from Chernyshev Viacheslav astellar at ro dot ru ---
Created attachment 32688
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32688action=edit
ftime-report for G++ 4.8.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
--- Comment #3 from Chernyshev Viacheslav astellar at ro dot ru ---
Created attachment 32689
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32689action=edit
ftime-report for G++ 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60955
Harald van Dijk harald at gigawatt dot nl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60955
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60955
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Perhaps also this special case could also be removed by using TREE_NO_WARNING.
diff --git a/gcc/cp/typeck.c b/gcc/cp/typeck.c
index c91612c..d8374d9 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/typeck.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52539
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 26 21:52:26 2014
New Revision: 209828
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209828root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-04-26 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52539
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 26 21:56:48 2014
New Revision: 209829
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=209829root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-04-26 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58407
Alex Howlett alex at suncho dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alex at suncho dot
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 02:57:38PM +, rohitarul...@freescale.com wrote:
Source file: gcc-4.8.2/gcc/varasm.c
@@ -7120,7 +7120,7 @@
if (CONSTANT_POOL_ADDRESS_P (symbol))
{
desc = SYMBOL_REF_CONSTANT (symbol);
output_constant_pool_1 (desc, 1);
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-24 10:39:10)
On Fri, 2014-04-18 at 10:03 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 17 Apr 2014 00:03:45 +0200, a écrit :
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 09 Apr 2014 09:36:42 +0200, a écrit :
Well, the first step is to verify that
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 05:32:54PM -0700, Cong Hou wrote:
In this patch a new reload-rewrite pattern detector is composed to
handle the following pattern in the loop being vectorized:
x = *p;
...
y = *p;
or
*p = x;
...
y = *p;
In both cases, *p is reloaded
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
don't you think that it would be easier to understand the number if you
printed it largest index first, as in the routines in wide-int-print.cc?
Yeah, that's what the patch does. E.g. (for 32-bit HWI):
[...,0x3,0x8000]
is 7 31.
Thanks,
Am 12.04.2014 21:33, schrieb Thomas Koenig:
please find attached a patch for PR 59604.
The patch makes sure that, if -fno-range-check is specified,
using int on an overflowing boz constant yields the same
result for compile-time simplification and run-time
execution.
OK for trunk?
Looks good
Another column info improvements, this time for initializer
warnings. warning_init and add_pending_init had to gain new location
parameter.
What is worth mentioning is that the (near initialization for X)
message seems next to useless to me now with caret diagnostics (?).
Regtested/bootstrapped
On 13-03-14 21:49, Richard Henderson wrote:
(define_expand ldexpxf3
- [(set (match_dup 3)
- (float:XF (match_operand:SI 2 register_operand)))
- (parallel [(set (match_operand:XF 0 register_operand)
- (unspec:XF [(match_operand:XF 1 register_operand)
-
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 13-03-14 21:49, Richard Henderson wrote:
(define_expand ldexpxf3
- [(set (match_dup 3)
- (float:XF (match_operand:SI 2 register_operand)))
- (parallel [(set (match_operand:XF 0 register_operand)
-
Hi,
Attached patch implements TARGET_ATOMIC_ASSIGN_EXPAND_FENV for ARM. With
this, atomic test-case gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c now PASS.
This implementation is based on SPARC and i386 implementations.
Regression tested on qemu-arm for arm-none-linux-gnueabi with no new
regression. Is
Attached patch implements TARGET_ATOMIC_ASSIGN_EXPAND_FENV for AARCH64.
With this, atomic test-case gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c now PASS.
This implementation is based on SPARC and i386 implementations.
Regression tested on qemu-aarch64 for aarch64-none-linux-gnu with no new
regression. Is
±On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 08:53 +0200, Justus Winter wrote:
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-24 10:39:10)
On Fri, 2014-04-18 at 10:03 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 17 Apr 2014 00:03:45 +0200, a écrit :
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 09 Apr 2014 09:36:42 +0200, a écrit :
On 25-04-14 15:22, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com writes:
diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
index 45256e9..b61cd44 100644
--- a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
+++ b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
@@ -7027,11 +7027,17 @@ mips_expand_call (enum
Hello!
2014-04-26 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/alias-30.c (dg-options): Dump only fre1 details.
* gcc.dg/vect/pr60505.c: Cleanup vect tree dump.
* g++.dg/ipa/devirt-27.C (dg-options): Remove -fdump-ipa-devirt.
Committed to mainline and 4.9 branch.
Uros.
Index:
i am sorry, i missed the fact that the loop counts up but you were
reversing the order in the indexes.
kenny
On 04/26/2014 04:26 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
don't you think that it would be easier to understand the number if you
printed it
this is fine.
kenny
On 04/25/2014 09:44 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
We should write back the sign-extended value.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/wide-int.cc
===
--- gcc/wide-int.cc
Eric,
Honza,
This patch adds analysis in pass_final to track which hard registers are set or
clobbered by the function body, and stores that information in a
struct cgraph_node, to be used in the fuse-caller-save optmization.
This is the updated version of the previously approved patch
2014-03-21 James Greenhalgh james.greenha...@arm.com
* calls.c (initialize_argument_information): Always treat
PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED as 1, simplify code accordingly.
(expand_call): Likewise.
(emit_library_call_calue_1): Likewise.
* expr.c (PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED): Do
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
--
Eric Botcazou
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-26 13:59:57)
For reference, here are my notes about one of these crashes (Svante,
is this still current?):
Yes it is, thanks for your help so far. Is the rpctrace bug you
mentioned that the wrong ports are reported?
~~~ snip ~~~
[...]
Eric Botcazou writes:
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
I believe Jakub is referring to the following in the C standard:
Parallel profiledbootstrap is supported on all maintained releases. So
just remove a misleading outdated sentence, that states the opposite,
from doc/install.texi.
OK for trunk?
Thanks.
2014-04-26 Markus Trippelsdorf mar...@trippelsdorf.de
* doc/install.texi (Building with profile
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 03:30:25PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
Eh, C99, 6.5.7/3:
If the value
On 25/04/14 20:50 -0400, Tim Shen wrote:
* include/bits/regex.tcc (__regex_algo_impl): Remove
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT and use
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_USE_THOMPSON_NFA instead.
* include/bits/regex_automaton.h: Remove quantifier counting variable.
*
OK if bootstrap succeeds?
With testing of the bootstrap build of the patch, I ran into the following
regression compared to a reference bootstrap build without the patch:
...
FAIL: g++.dg/tsan/cond_race.C -O2 output pattern test, is ==3087==WARNING:
Program is run with unlimited stack
On 25/04/14 18:03 -0400, Tim Shen wrote:
* include/bits/regex_executor.h: Add _M_rep_count to track how
many times this repeat node are visited.
is visited not are visited
@@ -151,6 +156,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
// character.
I believe Jakub is referring to the following in the C standard:
Bitwise shift operators
...
Semantics
... If the value of the right operand ... is greater than or equal to the
width of the promoted left operand, the behavior is undefined.
So on 16-bit int systems you can't portably
So, if you have int16 target, where unsigned int is 16-bit and UINT_MAX
65535, then shift count must be = 0 and 16, therefore, 2U 31 is
undefined behavior.
Well, if the shift count is masked by the target, if will be masked according
to the width of the register and the result will
On Sat, 26 Apr 2014, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
Parallel profiledbootstrap is supported on all maintained releases. So
just remove a misleading outdated sentence, that states the opposite,
from doc/install.texi.
OK for trunk?
Okay. If this also applies to GCC 4.9 (which I think is the
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
Successfully generates HTML, info and pdf via appropriate make
invocations; example of resulting HTML can be seen at the bottom of:
http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2014-04-25/Tuple-representation.html
The diagram is split over pages 178-180 of
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
+ * opts.c (common_handle_option): Disable -fipa-reference coorectly
+ with -fuse-profile.
coorectly - correctly
Gerald
Hi,
Shall it a good idea to add new warning -Wsizeof-array-argument that
warns when sizeof is applied on parameter declared as an array ?
Similar to clang's -Wsizeof-array-argument:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20110613/042812.html
This was also reported as
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
From all I have seen and heard, this rewrite is a clear improvement
over the status quo. So I am going to review and approve it wearing
my doc maintainer hat, deferring to and relying on Andrew and Richard
and their deep expertise on the technical side.
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
It was pointed out to me off-list that this patch series lacks
documentation changes. I'm working on fixing that, though am not sure I
want to fill everyone inboxes with an updated set of patches yet.
Should I send a combined patch for the
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
Maybe a dumb question (I don't understand a lot of the regex code!)
but is it correct to set this to 1 in the case where
__rep_count.first != _M_current ? Could that result in the count
going downwards from 2 to 1?
61 matches
Mail list logo
