Re: GSOC Proposal

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >>> > > > On 2019-04-03 7:30 a.m., Ric

New Documents For(gcc@gcc.gnu.org)Your Shipment (Shipping SF electronic invoice notification)

2019-04-08 Thread SF Express
NB2r31v84�7AN30�1F�D0[A2b37�1A NB2 gcc@gcc.gnu.org a1F�22`A8�09bE9�7AN30�1F�D0cD0O9Bv84�01�27g0DRA1002`A8u33�F7v84u35[50SD1y68]F2b10R9FSD1QFA�01SD1y68�E6`C5Y82N0B�1A 1,44811594346; 2,44811504355; 3,44811504364; 4,81029652812; 5,811436742647; `A8SEFNE5pB9QFBNE5N0B�FEcA5N0B�7Du35[

Re: Putting an all-zero variable into BSS

2019-04-08 Thread Andrew Haley
On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > Hi Richard, > >> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in varasm.c. > > Thanks. I've done that, and this is what a patch could look like. > However, I will not have time to formally submit this until next > weekend. > > In the

Re: non-volatile automatic variables in setjmp tests

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 6:25 PM Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote: > > > Some setjmp/longjmp tests[1] depend on the value of an auto set before > > setjmp > > to to be retained after returning from the longjmp. As I understand, this > > behaviour is act

Re: is re-running bootstrap after a change safe?

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 1:09 AM Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 4/5/19 4:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 4/5/19 3:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > >> On 4/5/19 3:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > >>> On 4/5/19 2:50 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Say if the first bootstrap succeeds and I then change a single > >

Re: GSOC

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 11:10 AM ashwina kumar wrote: > > Hi , > > While working I just figured out that -Wconversion is buggy. Please see the > below code- - > > $ cat b.c > #include > > void main (void) > { > //contains build errors > uint16_t x = 1; > uint16_t y = 2; >

Re: Putting an all-zero variable into BSS

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:38 AM Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > >> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in > >> varasm.c. > > > > Thanks. I've done that, and this is what a patch could look like. > > However, I wil

Re: Putting an all-zero variable into BSS

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 11:33 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:38 AM Andrew Haley wrote: > > > > On 4/7/19 5:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > > > Hi Richard, > > > > > >> I don't know without looking, but I'd start at assemble_variable in > > >> varasm.c. > > > > > > Thanks. I

Re: GSOC

2019-04-08 Thread Martin Jambor
Hello, On Sun, Apr 07 2019, ashwina kumar wrote: > Hi , > > While working I just figured out that -Wconversion is buggy. Please see the > below code- - > > $ cat b.c > #include > > void main (void) > { > //contains build errors > uint16_t x = 1; > uint16_t y = 2; >

Re: non-volatile automatic variables in setjmp tests

2019-04-08 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks things > (PRE / scheduling / invariant motion are candidates). That's true, what Josef sees might point to a genuine bug in the middle-end observed only on msp430; but we do want

Re: non-volatile automatic variables in setjmp tests

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 2:31 PM Michael Matz wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > > > Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks things > > (PRE / scheduling / invariant motion are candidates). > > That's true, what Josef sees might point to a gen

Re: is re-running bootstrap after a change safe?

2019-04-08 Thread Jeff Law
On 4/8/19 3:19 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 1:09 AM Martin Sebor wrote: >> >> On 4/5/19 4:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> On 4/5/19 3:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 4/5/19 3:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 4/5/19 2:50 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> Say if the first bootstrap

Re: non-volatile automatic variables in setjmp tests

2019-04-08 Thread Jozef Lawrynowicz
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 14:45:17 +0200 Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 2:31 PM Michael Matz wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > Not sure if in this case we run into an RTL optimization that breaks > > > things > > > (PRE / scheduling / inva

Re: GSOC Proposal

2019-04-08 Thread nick
On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, nick wrote:

Re: GSOC Proposal

2019-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > >>> On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wrote: > > > On 2019-04-05 6:25 a.m., Rich

Re: GSoC OMPD

2019-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 02:24:09PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > > I know my first email is vague. I wanted to throw it out there since > > the April 9th deadline is coming up. > > I was hoping Jakub Jelinek, who would be the mentor, would chime in > earlier. But unfortunately he has probably not

Re: GSOC Proposal

2019-04-08 Thread nick
On 2019-04-08 9:42 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, nick wrote: > >> >> >> On 2019-04-08 3:29 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, nick wrote: >>> On 2019-04-07 5:31 a.m., Richard Biener wrote: > On April 5, 2019 6:11:15 PM GMT+02:00, nick wro