Re: [PATCH] add basic .gitattributes files to notice whitespace issues

On 02/04/2016 07:00 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders Hi, We can tell git to highlight whitespace errors in diffs, and if you enable the default pre-commit hook git won't allow you to make a commit with a whitespace error violating the rules

Re: [PATCH 02/18] make avail_stores a vec

On 04/20/2016 12:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-04-19 Trevor Saunders * print-rtl.c (print_rtx_insn_vec): New function. * print-rtl.h: New prototype. * rtl.h:

Re: [PATCH 00/18] towards removing rtx_insn_list and rtx_expr_list

On 04/20/2016 07:03 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org writes: I have some more patches that almost completely eliminate these, but I haven't tested the rest yet, and this is already a long series so it would be nice to get some of it out of my tree and reviewed. patches

Re: [PATCH 08/18] make side_effects a vec

On 04/20/2016 12:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-04-19 Trevor Saunders * var-tracking.c (struct adjust_mem_data): Make side_effects a vector. (adjust_mems): Adjust.

Re: [PATCH 05/18] make stores rtx_insn_list a vec

On 04/20/2016 05:45 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 02:22:09AM -0400, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: 2016-04-19 Trevor Saunders * gcse.c (struct ls_expr): make stores field a vector. Capital M. @@ -3604,7 +3604,7 @@ ldst_entry

Re: [PATCH 04/18] remove unused loads rtx_insn_list

On 04/20/2016 12:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-04-19 Trevor Saunders * gcse.c (struct ls_expr): Remove loads field. (ldst_entry): Adjust. (free_ldst_entry):

Re: [PATCH 01/18] stop using rtx_insn_list in reorg.c

On 04/20/2016 12:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-04-19 Trevor Saunders * reorg.c (try_merge_delay_insns): Make merged_insns a vector. OK. jeff

[Patch, regex, libstdc++/70745] Fix match_not_bow and match_not_eow

Bootstrapped and tested on x86-pc-linux-gnu debug. It is a conformance fix, but I don't think it's very important. I'm happy to backport it to gcc 5/4.9, but if it's not considered necessary, I'm Ok as well. Thanks! -- Regards, Tim Shen commit 7f4f729d5dd80050ff966398e28909a40fb57932 Author:

match.pd patch: u + 3 < u is u > UINT_MAX - 3

Hello, this optimizes a common pattern for unsigned overflow detection, when one of the arguments turns out to be a constant. There are more ways this could look like, (a + 42 <= 41) in particular, but that'll be for another patch. Bootstrap+regtest on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu.

Re: Looking for some help with GCC 6 and bad code generation

This is kind of stream-of-conciousness but I swear there's an interesting new bit about 8 paragraphs down. :) On 04/20/2016 07:18 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Zan Lynx wrote: >> > I would like someone to look at this and tell me this is an already >>

gcc-6-20160421 is now available

Snapshot gcc-6-20160421 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20160421/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6

[Bug target/70750] [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70750 --- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Thu Apr 21 22:01:34 2016 New Revision: 235353 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235353=gcc=rev Log: X86: Fix a typo in call_insn_operand r231923 has ;; Test for a valid

Re: Does gcc cilk plus support include offloading to graphics hardware?

That basic tutorial code was last updated 3 years ago. I think we've established pretty clearly that gcc does _not_ have full support of what intel calls cilk plus. Offload not supported, and the 3 year old basic introductory tutorial code from the cilkplus.org website doesn't compile. I'm likely

[Bug ipa/68331] [meta-bug] fipa-pta issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68331 --- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to David Abdurachmanov from comment #10) > I have been reg-testing GCC 6 for the last few weeks and I hit an issue with > compile code straggly segfaulting. > > Compiler with GCC 5.3.0,

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE in predicate_mem_writes (PR tree-optimization/70725)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 05:23:34PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Bin.Cheng wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:57:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > > >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at

Re: [PATCH][cilkplus] fix c++ implicit conversions with cilk_spawn (PR/69024, PR/68997)

On 01/20/2016 12:57 PM, Ryan Burn wrote: case AGGR_INIT_EXPR: + { + int len = 0; + int ii = 0; + extract_free_variables (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), wd, ADD_READ); + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (t, 0)) == INTEGER_CST) + { + len = TREE_INT_CST_LOW

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:50 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > I tried and it doesn't work since the correct mode may not be always

[Bug ipa/68331] [meta-bug] fipa-pta issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68331 --- Comment #11 from David Abdurachmanov --- "Good" code, annotated by me. Now notice from my previous message that the fix for this PR, caused 49 89 1c 24 mov%rbx,(%r12) to be removed. We lost one instruction which stored the

[Bug ipa/68331] [meta-bug] fipa-pta issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68331 David Abdurachmanov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot

[Bug ada/70759] New: Ada rts fails to build with -mabi=ilp32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70759 Bug ID: 70759 Summary: Ada rts fails to build with -mabi=ilp32 Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ada

Is MODES_TIEABLE_P transitive?

As I start to allow integer modes into vector registers, I need to revisit MODES_TIEABLE_P. I'm wondering if MODES_TIEABLE_P is transitive? For example, with the current Power8 system 1) Anything can go in GPRs 2) Currently, SFmode/DFmode/KFmode, and vectors can go in VSX registers

[Bug c++/66067] [6 Regression] tree check ICE: accessed elt 1 of tree_vec with 0 elts in write_template_args, at cp/mangle.c:2574

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66067 --- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Victoria from comment #14) > issue not seen in GCC 5.x branch, is possible to backport the patch? I don't understand. If the issue is not seen, why backport?

[Bug c++/70540] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on invalid code in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic, at cp/typeck2.c:569

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE |[4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on

[Bug c++/70540] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid code in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic, at cp/typeck2.c:569

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540 --- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Thu Apr 21 19:42:34 2016 New Revision: 235348 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235348=gcc=rev Log: /cp 2016-04-21 Paolo Carlini PR

Re: Does gcc cilk plus support include offloading to graphics hardware?

2016-04-21 7:09 GMT+03:00 Hal Ashburner : > Another cilk plus question: > Is op_ostream also considered to be outside of cilk plus? > https://www.cilkplus.org/docs/doxygen/include-dir/group___reducers_ostream.html > I am trying to compile the basic "Cilk Plus Tutorial Sources"

[Bug c/70742] Support div as a builtin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742 --- Comment #11 from Marcos Diaz --- (In reply to Daniel Gutson from comment #10) > (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #8) > > "The div, ldiv, and lldiv functions return a structure of type div_t, > > ldiv_t, and lldiv_t, respectively,

[Bug c/70742] Support div as a builtin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742 --- Comment #10 from Daniel Gutson --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #8) > "The div, ldiv, and lldiv functions return a structure of type div_t, > ldiv_t, and lldiv_t, respectively, comprising both the quotient and the > remainder. The

[Bug c/70742] Support div as a builtin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742 --- Comment #9 from Daniel Gutson --- Created attachment 38323 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38323=edit sample script to be called from the build system

RE: [AArch64] Add more precision choices for the reciprocal square root approximation

> On 04/04/16 11:13, Evandro Menezes wrote: > > On 04/01/16 18:08, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > >> Evandro Menezes wrote: > >>> I hope that this gets in the ballpark of what's been discussed > >>> previously. > >> Yes that's very close to what I had in mind. A minor issue is that > >> the vector modes

RE: [AArch64] Emit square root using the Newton series

> On 04/05/16 17:30, Evandro Menezes wrote: > > On 04/05/16 13:37, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > >> I can't get any of these to work... Not only do I get a large number > >> of collisions and duplicated code between these patches, when I try > >> to resolve them, all I get is crashes whenever I try to

RE: [AArch64] Emit division using the Newton series

> On 04/04/16 14:06, Evandro Menezes wrote: > > On 04/01/16 17:52, Evandro Menezes wrote: > >> On 04/01/16 17:45, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > >>> Evandro Menezes wrote: > >>> > However, I don't think that there's the need to handle any special > case for division. The only case when the

Re: [PATCH][doc] Update documentation of AArch64 options

On 04/21/2016 10:26 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi index e9763d44d8d7aa6a64821a4b1811e550254e..ddd4eeaec1502f871d0febd6045e37153c48a7e1 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi @@ -12827,9 +12827,9 @@ These options are

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70750: [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:46 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > r231923 has > > ;; Test for a valid operand for a call instruction. > ;; Allow constant call address operands in Pmode only. > (define_special_predicate "call_insn_operand" >(ior (match_test

[Bug c++/70758] unique_ptr<T[]> of aligned T calls invalid free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70758 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

Re: Document OpenACC status for GCC 6

On 04/21/2016 10:21 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: + Code will be offloaded onto multiple gangs, but executes with + just one worker, and a vector length of 1. "will be" (future) vs "executes" (present). Assuming this is all supposed to describe current behavior, please write

[Bug libfortran/70684] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] incorrect reading of values from file on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684 --- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to Andy May from comment #12) > I don't know that it's necessary or desired to support both '\n' and '\r' as > eol, but instead the native eol just needs to be used consistently > everywhere, for

[Bug c++/70744] preincrements possibly double-evaluated in GNU ternaries

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70744 --- Comment #5 from Donald Chai --- For what it's worth, post-increments behave as I would expect: $ cat test.c int main() { int x = 1; x++ ?: 0xbeef; return x; } $ gcc-5 -x c test.c; ./a.out; echo $? 2 $ gcc-5 -x c++ test.c;

[Bug c++/70758] unique_ptr<T[]> of aligned T calls invalid free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70758 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- I think this is a dup of PR 36159.

[Bug libfortran/70684] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] incorrect reading of values from file on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684 --- Comment #12 from Andy May --- I don't know that it's necessary or desired to support both '\n' and '\r' as eol, but instead the native eol just needs to be used consistently everywhere, for example something like the following pseudo code:

[Bug c/70756] Wrong column number shown for "error: invalid use of flexible array member"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70756 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70744] preincrements possibly double-evaluated in GNU ternaries

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70744 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- A possible fix seems to be --- a/gcc/tree.c +++ b/gcc/tree.c @@ -4255,6 +4255,12 @@ stabilize_reference (tree ref) volatiles. */ return stabilize_reference_1 (ref); +case

[PATCH] PR target/70750: [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

r231923 has ;; Test for a valid operand for a call instruction. ;; Allow constant call address operands in Pmode only. (define_special_predicate "call_insn_operand" (ior (match_test "constant_call_address_operand (op, mode == VOIDmode ? mode : Pmode)")

[Bug target/70750] [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70750 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 38322 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38322=edit A patch

[Bug c++/70758] New: unique_ptr<T[]> of aligned T calls invalid free

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70758 Bug ID: 70758 Summary: unique_ptr of aligned T calls invalid free Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libfortran/70684] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] incorrect reading of values from file on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684 --- Comment #11 from Ray Donnelly --- I wonder if opening the files in text mode on Windows would be possible? I don't know a lot about fortran at present, but doing that would cause Windows to dump the \r's for you. On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at

[Bug target/70750] [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70750 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- r231923 has (define_special_predicate "call_insn_operand" (ior (match_test "constant_call_address_operand (op, mode == VOIDmode ? mode : Pmode)") (match_operand 0

[PATCH GCC]Refactor IVOPT.

Hi, This patch refactors IVOPT in three major aspects: Firstly it rewrites iv_use groups. Use group is originally introduced only for address type uses, this patch makes it general to all (generic, compare, address) types. Currently generic/compare groups contain only one iv_use, and compare

Re: tuple move constructor

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 20 April 2016 at 21:42, Marc Glisse wrote: Hello, does anyone remember why the move constructor of _Tuple_impl is not defaulted? The attached patch does not cause any test to fail (whitespace kept to avoid line number changes). Maybe something

Re: GCC 6 symbol poisoning and c++ header usage is fragile

On 21 April 2016 at 17:47, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely > wrote: >> >> I once tried to write a gcc plugin that would check all names defined >> by libstdc++ and ensure they were either in the reserved namespace, or >> were in a

[Bug plugins/70757] New: Add plugin callbacks that run early enough to check for declarations using "bad" names

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70757 Bug ID: 70757 Summary: Add plugin callbacks that run early enough to check for declarations using "bad" names Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/70756] New: Wrong column number shown for "error: invalid use of flexible array member"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70756 Bug ID: 70756 Summary: Wrong column number shown for "error: invalid use of flexible array member" Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

Re: GCC 6 symbol poisoning and c++ header usage is fragile

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely > wrote: >> >> I once tried to write a gcc plugin that would check all names defined >> by libstdc++ and ensure they were either in the reserved

[Bug c++/70513] [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on invalid C++ code on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70513 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/70513] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE on invalid C++ code on x86_64-linux-gnu: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70513 --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Thu Apr 21 16:52:51 2016 New Revision: 235347 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235347=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/70513 * parser.c (cp_parser_enum_specifier): Check and

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 70540 ("[4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on invalid code in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic...")

OK for trunk and 6.2. Jason

[Bug target/70750] [6/7 Regression] Load and call no longer combined for indirect calls on x86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70750 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/70744] preincrements possibly double-evaluated in GNU ternaries

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70744 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- So build_conditional_expr_1 has 4626 /* As a G++ extension, the second argument to the conditional can be 4627 omitted. (So that `a ? : c' is roughly equivalent to `a ? a : 4628 c'.) If the

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #14 from Julian Taylor --- I am on x86_64. It actually does vectorize with -mavx but not with -msse2. The other variant of the loop I posted does vectorize with sse2. $ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 7.0.0 20160421 (experimental

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:50 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > I tried and it doesn't work since the correct mode may not be always available in predicates. Yes, they pass mode. But they just do

Re: [PATCH] Reuse the saved_scope structures allocated by push_to_top_level

OK. Jason

[Bug c++/70755] New: [ARM] excessive struct alignment for globals

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70755 Bug ID: 70755 Summary: [ARM] excessive struct alignment for globals Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:50 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> I tried and it doesn't work since the correct mode may not be always >>> available in predicates. Yes, they pass mode. But they just do >>> >>> mode = GET_MODE (op); >>> >>> which returns VOIDmode for -1. >> >> Well,

[Bug libfortran/70684] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] incorrect reading of values from file on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70684 --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to Ray Donnelly from comment #9) > Should the other two places - next_char_default () and next_char_internal () > -that also do: > > dtp->u.p.at_eol = (c == '\n' || c == EOF); > > not check for

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Julian Taylor from comment #12) > the testcase in this ticket is not yet vectorized with gcc 20160421 (r235341) Hi Julian, may I ask which target? It can be vectorized on x86

Re: C++ PATCH to fix a part of c++/70513 (ICE-on-invalid with enums)

OK. Jason

[PATCH][doc] Update documentation of AArch64 options

Update documentation of AArch64 options for GCC6 to be more accurate, fix a few minor mistakes and remove some duplication. Tested with "make info dvi pdf html" and checked resulting PDF is as expected. OK for trunk and backport to GCC6.1 branch? ChangeLog: 2016-04-21 Wilco Dijkstra

Document OpenACC status for GCC 6

Hi! OK to commit (something like) the following? Should something be added to the "News" section on itself? (I don't know the policy for that. We didn't suggest that for GCC 5, because at that time we described the support as a "preliminary implementation of the OpenACC

Re: C++ PATCH to fix a part of c++/70513 (ICE-on-invalid with enums)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:57:30AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 04/21/2016 07:35 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >+ permerror (type_start_token->location, > >+ "extra qualification not allowed"); > >+ type = error_mark_node; > > If we're using permerror, we

[PATCH] Fixup nb_iterations_upper_bound adjustment for vectorized loops

Hi, Currently when loop is vectorized we adjust its nb_iterations_upper_bound by dividing it by VF. This is incorrect since nb_iterations_upper_bound is upper bound for ( - 1) and therefore simple dividing it by VF in many cases gives us bounds greater than a real one. Correct value would be

Re: [PATCH][wwwdocs] Add deprecation of pre-ARMv4T architectures to the release notes

Hi Gerald, On 21/04/16 14:51, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: This patch lists the -mcpu and -march values that are deprecated for GCC 6. Joel indicated that it would be useful to enumerate them all. Yes, this is very useful. Thank you! Ok to commit?

Re: GCC 6 symbol poisoning and c++ header usage is fragile

On 21 April 2016 at 15:32, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> Those rules belong in a POSIX binding for C++, not in the C++ >> standard, but unfortunately the group working on that has been >> inactive for some time. >> >> (In the absence of an official binding, I think a reasonable rule that >> would work

[Bug tree-optimization/70754] [5/6 Regression] ICE during predictive commoning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

[Bug tree-optimization/70754] New: ICE during predictive commoning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754 Bug ID: 70754 Summary: ICE during predictive commoning Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization

Re: gomp_target_fini

Hi! On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:43:22 +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:01:06PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > [...] Alexander's much smaller patch with subject: "libgomp plugin: make > > >

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #12 from Julian Taylor --- the testcase in this ticket is not yet vectorized with gcc 20160421 (r235341)

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX-512] Fix PR target/70728.

Hello, On 21 Apr 14:50, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Hello, > Patch in the bottom fixes mentioned PR by separating > AVX and AVX-512BW constraints. > > gcc/ > * gcc/config/i386/sse.md (define_insn "3"): > Extract AVX-512BW constraint from AVX. > gcc/testsuite/ > *

[Bug target/70728] GCC trunk emits invalid assembly for knl target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70728 --- Comment #3 from Kirill Yukhin --- Author: kyukhin Date: Thu Apr 21 15:29:29 2016 New Revision: 235344 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235344=gcc=rev Log: AVX-512. PR target/70728. Use separate constraint for AVX-512BW PR target/70728

[Bug c++/70744] preincrements possibly double-evaluated in GNU ternaries

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70744 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE in predicate_mem_writes (PR tree-optimization/70725)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:57:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >> It leads to ICE

[Bug c++/70522] Hidden friend functions block qualified name lookup into nested unnamed namespace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70522 Casey Carter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Casey at Carter dot net --- Comment #2

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE in predicate_mem_writes (PR tree-optimization/70725)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:57:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> It leads to ICE on 32-bit x86 host: >> >>

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE in predicate_mem_writes (PR tree-optimization/70725)

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:57:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > It leads to ICE on 32-bit x86 host: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70725#c8 I can't reproduce with gcc-6: $ xgcc-6 -O3 -march=skylake-avx512

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #11 from Andreas Schwab --- > Isn't that what was reported in PR70725 for its fix? Does r235341 fix it? Yes and yes, but r235252 didn't trigger it.

[Bug bootstrap/70704] [6 Regression] AIX bootstrap comparison failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704 --- Comment #36 from David Edelsohn --- It definitely is Flex. gcc-6-branch r235040 and r235340 fail when built with Flex 2.6.0. gcc-6.0.1-RC-20160415 fails using the supplied gengtype-lex.c created with Flex 2.5.37.

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR70725 (followup to Mareks patch)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 02:20:34PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> > >> > The following fixes the followup ICEs in the testcase for PR70725 >> > where Markes patch only fixed

[4.9/5/6: PATCH] Replace -skip-rax-setup with -mskip-rax-setup

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:56 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > This fixed a typo. Checked into trunk. > > H.J. > --- > Index: gcc/ChangeLog > === > --- gcc/ChangeLog (revision 235274) > +++ gcc/ChangeLog

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:54 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:43 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #7) > The second commit triggers this ICE on ia64: > > $ gcc/xgcc -Bgcc/ ../../gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70725.c -O3 -S >

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab --- The same ICE also occurs on m68k and aarch64.

[Bug c/70753] missing diagnostic in C11 mode: sizeof, _Alignof of function type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70753 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- But you get the warning with -Wpedantic, right?

[Bug c/70753] missing diagnostic in C11 mode: sizeof, _Alignof of function type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70753 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/70753] missing diagnostic in C11 mode: sizeof, _Alignof of function type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70753 --- Comment #2 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1) > Why would it have to be error? If you want errors instead of warnings, use > -pedantic-errors. I did not know about -pedantic-errors. It is extremely

Re: GCC 6 symbol poisoning and c++ header usage is fragile

On 4/21/2016 8:20 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 21 April 2016 at 13:33, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 21/04/16 12:52, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 21 April 2016 at 12:11, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: the root cause is c++: c++ headers include random libc headers with _GNU_SOURCE ftm so all sorts of

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 > > --- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab --- > The second commit

[Bug tree-optimization/69489] missed vectorization for boolean loop, missed if-conversion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489 --- Comment #7 from Andreas Schwab --- The second commit triggers this ICE on ia64: $ gcc/xgcc -Bgcc/ ../../gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70725.c -O3 -S ../../gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70725.c: In function ‘fn1’:

[PATCH] Avoid allocating garbage GIMPLE_NOPs at LTO stream in time

The following avoids allocating a GIMPLE_NOP as a def for all SSA names (we stream stmts and adjust SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT later). This requires us to make sure we do not have unused SSA names around which we can easily achieve at stream-out time - otherwise passes walking over all SSA names

Re: [PATCH] add support for placing variables in shared memory

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 04/20/16 12:58, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > Allow using __attribute__((shared)) to place static variables in '.shared' > > memory space. > > What is the rationale for a new attribute, rather than leveraging the existing > section(".shared")

[Bug c/70753] New: missing diagnostic in C11 mode: sizeof, _Alignof of function type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70753 Bug ID: 70753 Summary: missing diagnostic in C11 mode: sizeof, _Alignof of function type Product: gcc Version: 6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Ping] [C++ Patch] PR 70540 ("[4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on invalid code in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic...")

Hi, On 14/04/2016 11:50, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, in this regression we ICE during error recovery after an additional redundant error message. I think it's one of those cases (we have got quite a few elsewhere, in semantics.c too) when it's better to immediately return error_mark_node when

[Bug bootstrap/70704] [6 Regression] AIX bootstrap comparison failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70704 --- Comment #35 from David Edelsohn --- Flex 2.6.0 works with --enable-checking=yes, but may not work with --enable-checking=release. I believe that Flex may be the culprit. If the current bootstrap confirms that, I am going to bootstrap with

  1   2   3   >