On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Vladimir Makarov writes:
>> On 2014-05-13, 6:27 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In haifa-sched.c (in rank_for_schedule) I notice that live range
>>> shrinkage is not performed when SCHED_PRESSURE_MODEL is used and the
>>> c
Hi,
I'm using gcc-4.9.0 and have a problem with the following program.
I have reported the problem allready on gcc-help some days ago,
but didn't get any replies. Perhaps somebody in this list knows,
if the behaviour is intended.
#include
#include
#include
int main (void)
{
#pragma omp para
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi,
> I am looking at some code of our target, which is not optimized as expected.
> For the following RTX, I expect source of insn 17 should be propagated into
> insn 20, and insn 17 is eliminated as a result. On our target, it will become
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathame
On 2014-05-14, 1:33 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
Hello All:
I am planning to implement the Live range splitting based on the following
cases in the Integrated Register Allocator.
For a given Live range that spans from from outer region to inner region of
the loop. Such Live ranges which a
On 2014-05-14, 12:38 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov writes:
On 2014-05-13, 6:27 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
In haifa-sched.c (in rank_for_schedule) I notice that live range
shrinkage is not performed when SCHED_PRESSURE_MODEL is used and the
comment mentions that it resul
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20140514 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20140514/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Bie
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas
There is a discrepancy when passing empty struct in C++ on x86-64
between GCC and Clang:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/x86-64-abi/EZzVyvSxUx4
An empty struct of size 1 byte is classified as NO_CLASS.
GCC uses an eight byte slot to pass it on stack and returns it in
EAX while Clang just
Sorry for resending again as Plain Text as my earlier mail was sent with HTML
enable. This makes enable to send it to gcc@gcc.gnu.org.
Sorry once again.
Thanks & Regards
Ajit
From: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 10:43 PM
To: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'; 'vmaka...@redhat.com'
Cc: 'Micha
Vladimir Makarov writes:
> On 2014-05-13, 6:27 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In haifa-sched.c (in rank_for_schedule) I notice that live range
>> shrinkage is not performed when SCHED_PRESSURE_MODEL is used and the
>> comment mentions that it results in much worse code.
>>
>> Could any
On 2014-05-13, 6:27 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
In haifa-sched.c (in rank_for_schedule) I notice that live range
shrinkage is not performed when SCHED_PRESSURE_MODEL is used and the
comment mentions that it results in much worse code.
Could anyone elaborate on this? Was it just empiricall
Hi,
I am looking at some code of our target, which is not optimized as expected.
For the following RTX, I expect source of insn 17 should be propagated into
insn 20, and insn 17 is eliminated as a result. On our target, it will become a
predicated xor instruction instead of two. Initially, I th
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas Schwab
>>> wrote:
Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
>
On 21/03/14 17:30, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Certain GIMPLE codes, such as OpenMP ones, have a structured block
> attached to them, for exmaple, gcc/gimple.def:GIMPLE_OMP_PARALLEL:
>
> /* GIMPLE_OMP_PARALLEL represents
>
>#pragma omp parallel [CLAUSES]
>BODY
>
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Andreas Schwab
>>> wrote:
Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
>
On 05/13/2014 12:12 PM, niXman wrote:
I'm curious whether there is reason to use 'vfork()' rather than 'fork()'?
Without memory overcommitment, fork needs physical backing storage (RAM
or swap) for all copy-on-write pages in the new process. vfork doesn't.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Produ
21 matches
Mail list logo
