Re: .../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

On January 6, 2017 2:11:51 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:07:23PM +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >> On 06/01/17 12:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and >patchlevel >> > versions from the directory layout, just us

Re: input address reload issue

On 01/06/2017 09:37 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: I would suggesting moving away from cc0 first. cc0 is an abomination and should have been abolished years ago -- the only reason is many old ports would break and nobody's taken the time to convert them or propose them for deprecation. It's 8 out of

Re: input address reload issue

> I would suggesting moving away from cc0 first. cc0 is an abomination > and should have been abolished years ago -- the only reason is many old > ports would break and nobody's taken the time to convert them or propose > them for deprecation. It's 8 out of 47 ports, most of them old indeed, with

Re: un-optimal code because of forwprop after gcc-5?

On 01/06/2017 03:09 AM, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote: Found a code size regression for AVR target in gcc-5 and higher. Looks like it is applicable to x86_64 also. Please file a bug. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla Jeff

Re: input address reload issue

On 01/06/2017 03:26 AM, Aurelien Buhrig wrote: Look at the dump file for reload to see where things come from. Also everything Jeff said; you really want LRA. I will try switching to LRA in a second step, but I think I need first to remove the old cc0... BTW, in which way the LRA is better

Re: input address reload issue

On 01/06/2017 03:20 AM, Aurelien Buhrig wrote: So the insn: (set (reg:QI 0 r0) (mem:QI (plus:SI (reg:SI 2 r2)(const_int 1)) is transformed into: (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (reg:SI 2 r2)) (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (const_int 1)) (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (plus:SI (reg:SI 8 a0) (reg:SI 8 a0))) (set (reg:QI 0 r0) (mem

Re: ICE on using -floop-nest-optimize

On 01/06/2017 03:28 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 06/01/17 14:22, Toon Moene wrote: On the attached (Fortran) source, the following version of gfortran draws an ICE: $ gfortran -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gfortran COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/lto-wrapper Target:

Re: ICE on using -floop-nest-optimize

On 06/01/17 14:22, Toon Moene wrote: On the attached (Fortran) source, the following version of gfortran draws an ICE: $ gfortran -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gfortran COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/confi

ICE on using -floop-nest-optimize

On the attached (Fortran) source, the following version of gfortran draws an ICE: $ gfortran -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gfortran COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 6.2.1

Re: .../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 02:13:05PM +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 06/01/17 13:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:07:23PM +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > >> On 06/01/17 12:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >>> SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and patchlevel >

Re: .../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

On 06/01/17 13:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:07:23PM +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >> On 06/01/17 12:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and patchlevel >>> versions from the directory layout, just uses the major number, it i

Re: Converting to LRA (calling all maintainers)

On 16/09/2016 22:37, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Hi! Since a few days TARGET_LRA_P defaults to returning "true". I changed all in-tree ports to still behave the same as before, which for most ports means they use old reload always. All the primary platforms (see the release criteria,

Re: .../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:07:23PM +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 06/01/17 12:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and patchlevel > > versions from the directory layout, just uses the major number, it is very > > what is the benefit? Various p

Re: .../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

On 06/01/17 12:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and patchlevel > versions from the directory layout, just uses the major number, it is very what is the benefit?

.../lib/gcc//7.1.1/ vs. .../lib/gcc//7/

Hi! SUSE and some other distros use a hack that omits the minor and patchlevel versions from the directory layout, just uses the major number, it is very uncommon to have more than one compiler for the same major number installed in the same prefix now that major bumps every year and the distincti

Re: input address reload issue

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 11:26:40AM +0100, Aurelien Buhrig wrote: > > Look at the dump file for reload to see where things come from. Also > > everything Jeff said; you really want LRA. > > I will try switching to LRA in a second step, but I think I need first to > remove the old cc0... :-) > B

Re: input address reload issue

> Look at the dump file for reload to see where things come from. Also > everything Jeff said; you really want LRA. I will try switching to LRA in a second step, but I think I need first to remove the old cc0... BTW, in which way the LRA is better than IRA? Is there any benchmarks? Thanks for

Re: input address reload issue

>> So the insn: >> (set (reg:QI 0 r0) (mem:QI (plus:SI (reg:SI 2 r2)(const_int 1)) >> >> is transformed into: >> (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (reg:SI 2 r2)) >> (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (const_int 1)) >> (set (reg:SI 8 a0) (plus:SI (reg:SI 8 a0) (reg:SI 8 a0))) >> (set (reg:QI 0 r0) (mem:QI (reg:SI 8 a0)) >> >> Th

un-optimal code because of forwprop after gcc-5?

Found a code size regression for AVR target in gcc-5 and higher. Looks like it is applicable to x86_64 also. Test case ( options: -Os) - typedef unsigned int uint8_t __attribute__((__mode__(__QI__))); typedef unsigned int uint32_t __attribute__ ((__mode__ (__SI__))); typedef struct rpl_i

Re: input address reload issue

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 05:18:46PM +0100, Aurelien Buhrig wrote: > The issue happens when reloading: > > (set (reg:QI 47 [ _9 ]) > (mem:QI (plus:SI (reg/v/f:SI 68 [orig:51 in ] [51]) > (const_int 1 [0x1]) > > My understanding is that IRA allocates hardregs to allocno which are >