RE: RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-16 Thread Matthew Fortune
H.J. Lu writes: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Fortune > wrote: > > H.J. Lu writes: > >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > The interrupt and exception handlers are called by x86 processors. X86 > >> > hardware puts information on stack and calls the handler. T

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Andreas Schwab
Mike Stump writes: > The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes > that require anything newer. SLES 12 has 1.4.4. 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 com

Re: Split Stack performance, signals

2015-09-16 Thread Anders Oleson
... >> Summary: >> prolog overhead, no call to __morestack : < 1 clock >> stock call to __morestack (hot): > 4000 clocks >> without signal blocking: < 60 clocks >> potential best case: < 6 clocks > > This sounds great. The data structure I was experimenting with ended up to be not very dif

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Jason Merrill: > >> There are lots of ancient branches and tags in the SVN repository that >> are no longer interesting, and it would be nice not to have them >> cluttering up the lists and default fetch set. > > Just one minor comment: Du

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Jason Merrill: > >> There are lots of ancient branches and tags in the SVN repository that >> are no longer interesting, and it would be nice not to have them >> cluttering up the lists and default fetch set. > > Just one minor comment: Du

Re: RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers

2015-09-16 Thread H.J. Lu
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Matthew Fortune wrote: > H.J. Lu writes: >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Fortune >> wrote: >> > H.J. Lu writes: >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> > The interrupt and exception handlers are called by x86 processors. X86 >>

Re: Split Stack performance, signals

2015-09-16 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Anders Oleson wrote: > > How difficult is it to modify the prologs that get generated? I think > I found the code that does that in i386.c and i386.md, but it is > pretty cryptic to me. Any pointers? I know exactly what I want the > assembler to look like. If so I

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread Andrew Cagney
On 15 September 2015 at 21:36, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > >>> cagney = Andrew Cagney >> cag...@gnu.org? > > Good point. The email identities of people change over time; forcing > a single arbitrary one to label all contributions is at best imprecise > and at worse a miscrediting. (This is one wa

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 09:26 AM, Andrew Cagney wrote: On 15 September 2015 at 21:36, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: cagney = Andrew Cagney cag...@gnu.org? Good point. The email identities of people change over time; forcing a single arbitrary one to label all contributions is at best imprecise and at wo

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Paul_Koning
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> ... >> Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent, >> so this might not be the best option. > > We could have a 2nd git repository just containing dele

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: > > > On Sep 16, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Richard Biener > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> ... > >> Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent, > >> so this might not be the best op

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Mike Stump
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Mike Stump writes: > >> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes >> that require anything newer. > > SLES 12 has 1.4.4. Would be nice to cover them as well, but their update schedule, 3-4 years, means that their

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 16/09/15 17:49, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: On Sep 16, 2015,@4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015@7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: ... Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent, so this might not be the best option. We could have a 2nd git reposit

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote: > On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Mike Stump writes: >> >>> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes >>> that require anything newer. >> >> SLES 12 has 1.4.4. > > Would be nice to cover them as well, but th

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people > are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT > will be possible. Does this actually lower the entry barrier and will > attract contri

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote: On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: Mike Stump writes: The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes that require anything newer. SLES 12 has 1.4.4. Would be

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT will be possible. Does this actually lower

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 16 September 2015 at 18:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people >> are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT >> will be possible. Does thi

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Manuel López-Ibáñez
On 16 September 2015 at 18:48, Jeff Law wrote: >> Yes, I think so. "The kids" these days all want to use git, not svn. >> That's harder to do because you have to set up git *and* git-svn. > > Right. And I find that dealing with the mixture of git and git-svn to be a > real PITA. OK, I was not aw

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread Frank Ch. Eigler
Hi - > [...] > >- rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated, > >internet identity > I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses > are preferred over employer addresses when there's > 1 address on file. That makes sense, but how many people are

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:48:13AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/16/2015 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > >>My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people > >>are submitting GIT patches all the time). After

Re: reload question about unmet constraints

2015-09-16 Thread Ulrich Weigand
DJ Delorie wrote: > > In that case, you might be able to fix the bug by splitting the > > offending insns into two patterns, one only handling near mems > > and one handling one far mems, where the near/far-ness of the mem > > is verified by the *predicate* and not the constraints. > > But this m

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Hi - > >> [...] >> >- rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated, >> >internet identity > >> I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses >> are preferred over employer addresses when there

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:36:47AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > > > > >On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote: > >>On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab > >>wrote: > >>>Mike Stump writes: > >>> > The software presently works with 1.4.4 a

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 11:21 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: Hi - [...] - rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated, internet identity I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses are prefer

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread David Malcolm
On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 10:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > > > > > On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote: > >> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab > >> wrote: > >>> Mike Stump writes: > >>> > The software presently works with 1.4.4 and

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Mike Stump
On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question. > Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as part of > the source tree? TL;DR: No. We could, and indeed, some people do engineering that way. We instead dep

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 10:54 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: On 16 September 2015 at 18:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the con

Re: Git conversion: disposition of old branches and tags

2015-09-16 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/16/2015 11:15 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote: ANd it's not just the kids. As an "old fart" who has used a variety of mechanisms to manage GCC sources through the decades (including some that were never officially used), GIT wins hands-down. and its not just for people who send patches upstrea

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
On September 16, 2015 7:57:03 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump wrote: >On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: >> >> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question. > >> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as >part of the source tree? > >TL;DR: No. > >We

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
On September 16, 2015 7:39:42 PM GMT+02:00, David Malcolm wrote: >On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 10:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote: >> >> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab >> >> wrote: >> >>> M

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: >> >> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question. > >> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as part of >> the source tree? > > TL;DR: No. [snip] Th

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Mike Stump
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > Where Joseph said he'd wait some more.. I had thought I asked longer ago than > that, time flies if one has fun. > > I'd just require 1.5.3 just to avoid the time needed by folks to workaround > those silly ordering gotchas and lo

GNU Cauldron short survey

2015-09-16 Thread Jeremy Bennett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On behalf of the team who organized this year's GNU Tools Cauldron we have prepared a short survey to help us to plan future GNU Tools Cauldrons. This has already been sent directly to everyone who attended this year's meeting, but I am posting it her

gcc-4.9-20150916 is now available

2015-09-16 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20150916 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20150916/ 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

Re: dejagnu version update?

2015-09-16 Thread Segher Boessenkool
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 01:39:42PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > AIUI, we specifically need >= 1.5.3 (or a version with a backport) to > get support for multiple load_lib paths mentioned by Bernhard, which is > what motivated this thread (on gcc-patches, before it spread to the gcc > list): We als

Re: reload question about unmet constraints

2015-09-16 Thread DJ Delorie
> And in fact, you should be able to decide at *expand* time which > of the two you need for the given set of operands. I already check for multiple fars at expand, and force all but one of them to registers. Somewhere before reload they get put back in. >"rl78_virt_insns_ok () && rl78_far_

Re: Repository for the conversion machinery

2015-09-16 Thread DJ Delorie
"Frank Ch. Eigler" writes: > That makes sense, but how many people are in cagney's shoes I am one of those people - I have two email addresses listed in MAINTAINERS, with two sets of copyright papers filed with the FSF (a personal assignment and a work one). I use the appropriate email address