gcc-4.8-20141127 is now available

2014-11-27 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20141127 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20141127/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.8 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches

Re: Testing Leak Sanitizer?

2014-11-27 Thread Christophe Lyon
On 30 September 2014 at 19:08, Konstantin Serebryany wrote: > Correct, you can run tests from llvm tree with any compiler. > https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizerTestSuite > I've read that document, and as a first step I wanted to build LLVM + run the tests in the "bes

RE: Machine description and code generation

2014-11-27 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Mathias Roslund wrote: > But isn't the result of an 8bit signed divide the same as the result of > a 32bit signed divide when both operands are in the 8bit range? That is, > shouldn't the optimizers be able to do the same for signed divide as > well as shift operations? At

Re: Bernd Schmidt appointed as nvptx port maintainer

2014-11-27 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 11/21/2014 06:57 PM, Jeff Law wrote: Bernd, please add yourself as the maintainer for that port in the MAINTAINERS file. Thanks, done. Bernd

Re: Getting a build failure in glibc due to gcc changes on 32bit x86 glibc

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Senkevich
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 02:59:34PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > This looks like the same issue as I reported before about > check_consistency() since that is what is failing to assemble here > too. This is also fixed by this patch - https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-10/msg00746.html --

RE: Machine description and code generation

2014-11-27 Thread Mathias Roslund
> From: Joern Rennecke [mailto:joern.renne...@embecosm.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 6:13 PM > To: Mathias Roslund > Cc: GCC > Subject: Re: Machine description and code generation > > On 26 November 2014 at 16:48, Mathias Roslund > wrote: > > Since then I've added more instructions an