https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93709
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jiu Fu Guo
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d01cb80e0fbe23510a861faab9909b76837faf98
commit r9-8401-gd01cb80e0fbe23510a861faab9909b76837faf98
Author: Jiufu Guo
Date:
On 3/18/20 6:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/16/20 3:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/16/20 4:41 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The recent fix to avoid modifying in place the type argument in
handle_access_attribute (PR 92721) was incomplete and didn't fully
resolve the problem (an ICE in the C++
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 11:30:22PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 06:44:15PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>>> N.B. the CC list has got too big and is causing posts to this thread
>>> to be held for moderator approval.
>>
>>Ah, can cycle through the lists and raise that
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 06:44:15PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>> N.B. the CC list has got too big and is causing posts to this thread
>> to be held for moderator approval.
>
>Ah, can cycle through the lists and raise that limit.
>The default 10 is too low.
Didn't you have to lower that limit
On 3/12/20 6:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/12/20 11:03 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/11/20 3:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/11/20 2:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/11/20 12:57 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/9/20 6:08 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/9/20 5:39 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On
Jiufu Guo writes:
Hi!
I'd like to ping following patch. As near end of gcc10 stage 4, it seems
I would ask approval for GCC11 trunk.
Thanks,
Jiufu Guo
> Hi Honza and all,
>
> I updated the patch a little as below. Bootstrap and regtest are ok
> on powerpc64le.
>
> Is OK for trunk?
>
> Thanks
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 7:52 AM
> To: Yangfei (Felix)
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Zhanghaijian (A)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH PR94026] combine missed opportunity to simplify
> comparisons with
Hi Nick,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 08:56:11PM -0400, Nicholas Krause wrote:
> I've not sure if I've misunderstanding something in the combine code but
> in make_more_copies
> for combine.c this seems very odd:
> if (!(REG_P (dest) && !HARD_REGISTER_P (dest)))
> continue;
>
> rtx src =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94220
Bug ID: 94220
Summary: libgcc FTB for ARM Thump when optimizing for size
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
Greetings Segher,
I've not sure if I've misunderstanding something in the combine code but
in make_more_copies
for combine.c this seems very odd:
if (!(REG_P (dest) && !HARD_REGISTER_P (dest)))
continue;
rtx src = SET_SRC (set);
if (!(REG_P (src) && HARD_REGISTER_P (src)))
Hi!
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 02:52:14PM -0700, Jim Wilson wrote:
> I'm one of the old timers that likes our current work flow, but even I
> think that we are risking our future by staying with antiquated tools.
It's not ancient tools, it is low-requirement generic tools, and
everyone can use that
Hi!
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 06:33:08PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > [...] We need to think about setting up easier ways for people to
> > submit patches, rather than trying to fix all of the MUAs and MTAs
> > in the world.
>
> Another related point. We are comingling email as a
On 3/18/20 1:04 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:57:18PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
I noticed this last night:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/glibc-cvs/2020q1/069150.html
Presumably that's the fix.
Or maybe for REAL_TYPE just care here about TYPE_MODE
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 03:32:34PM +, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Similarly for non-call exceptions on other statements. It sounds like
> > what you're describing requires the corresponding definition to happen
> > for memory outputs regardless of
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Jim Wilson wrote:
> > The new mnemonics have been supported by GAS for a little while now and
> > the old ones have been retained, however this is still a change that
> > breaks backwards compatibility. So I wonder if we shouldn't have an
> > autoconf test included for this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93923
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Hi!
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:05:19AM +, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
> > Trying 7 -> 8:
> > 7: r99:SI=r103:SI>>0x8
> > REG_DEAD r103:SI
> > 8: r100:SI=r99:SI&0x6
> > REG_DEAD r99:SI
> > Failed to match this instruction:
> > (set (reg:SI 100)
> > (and:SI (lshiftrt:SI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94033
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
This attempts to make is_nothrow_constructible more robust (and
efficient to compile) by not depending on is_constructible. Instead the
__is_constructible intrinsic is used directly. The helper class
__is_nt_constructible_impl which checks whether the construction is
non-throwing now takes a bool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94033
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b3341826531e80e02f194460b4fbe1b0541c0463
commit r10-7270-gb3341826531e80e02f194460b4fbe1b0541c0463
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Segher:
>
> Yes, but only for this fprnd vs. 2.06 (vsx) situation. Like we
> already
> have:
>
> if (TARGET_DIRECT_MOVE && !TARGET_VSX)
> {
> if (rs6000_isa_flags_explicit & OPTION_MASK_DIRECT_MOVE)
> error ("%qs requires %qs", "-mdirect-move", "-mvsx");
>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:42 PM Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2020, Kito Cheng wrote:
> > - fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x renamed to fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x in the latest RISC-V ISA
> >manual.
>
> The new mnemonics have been supported by GAS for a little while now and
> the old ones have been
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 3/17/20 11:41 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > The script reports errors by emitting them as #error directives into
> > standard output (so they cause the build to fail). Should this new
> > routine do the same thing? (/dev/stderr is also not available on
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 at 22:45, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> > > Some git based projects are using gerrit.
> >
> > Which I looked into previously and decided I didn't like it. If I
> > recall correctly, gerrit has to "own" the repo, and so it's only
Andrea Corallo writes:
> Hi all,
>
> second version of the patch for the 200 characters limit for literal
> strings addressing comments.
>
> make check-jit is passing clean.
>
> Best Regards
> Andrea
>
> gcc/jit/ChangeLog
> 2020-??-?? Andrea Corallo
>
> * jit-playback.h
>
Hi all,
Updated version of the patch mainly addressing comments on the
concurrency issues.
I came to the conclusions that the caching should be done in the
function that we decide to be thread safe. However I haven't touched
parse_basever in any direction in the hope of having this still in
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> > Some git based projects are using gerrit.
>
> Which I looked into previously and decided I didn't like it. If I
> recall correctly, gerrit has to "own" the repo, and so it's only
The glibc experiment with gerrit worked without it owning
Hi -
> N.B. the CC list has got too big and is causing posts to this thread
> to be held for moderator approval.
Ah, can cycle through the lists and raise that limit.
The default 10 is too low.
- FChE
N.B. the CC list has got too big and is causing posts to this thread
to be held for moderator approval.
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 at 21:54, Jim Wilson wrote:
>
> I'm one of the old timers that likes our current work flow, but even I
> think that we are risking our future by staying with antiquated tools.
> One of the first things I need to teach new people is now to use email
> "properly". It is a
Hi, Jim -
> [gerrit etc.]
Good points.
> [...] We need to think about setting up easier ways for people to
> submit patches, rather than trying to fix all of the MUAs and MTAs
> in the world.
Another related point. We are comingling email as a communication
medium AND a commit transport
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/18/20 11:58 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Patrick Palka wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 3/16/20 1:39 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > > > In this PR, we are performing constexpr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94219
Bug ID: 94219
Summary: ICE in cxx_eval_bare_aggregate, at cp/constexpr.c:3790
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/541962.html
On 3/12/20 4:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/12/20 11:03 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/11/20 3:30 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/11/20 2:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/11/20 12:57 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/9/20 6:08
So I must have botched this when I hand-applied Richard's patch and use that to
generate a new one (I went back to his original and verified he got it right).
We had a test like
&& MEM_P (whatever)
ANd wanted to include regs ie
&& (MEM_P (whatever) || REG_P (whatever))
I added the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90275
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:529ea7d9596b26ba103578eeab448e9862a2d2c5
commit r10-7268-g529ea7d9596b26ba103578eeab448e9862a2d2c5
Author: Jeff Law
Date: Wed Mar 18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88466
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan
On 3/16/20 3:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/16/20 4:41 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The recent fix to avoid modifying in place the type argument in
handle_access_attribute (PR 92721) was incomplete and didn't fully
resolve the problem (an ICE in the C++ front-end). The attached
patch removes the
Hi!
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 09:30:02AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:40:38AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > Using a call-saved register to cache a load out of the PLT looks
> > > really silly
> >
> > Who said anything about using call-saved registers? GCC will
I'm one of the old timers that likes our current work flow, but even I
think that we are risking our future by staying with antiquated tools.
One of the first things I need to teach new people is now to use email
"properly". It is a barrier to entry for new contributors, since our
requirements
On 3/5/20 2:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
As the testcases shows, the -Wconversion warning behaves quite differently
when -fsanitize=undefined vs. when not sanitizing, but in the end it is
not something specific to sanitizing, if a user uses
return static_cast(static_cast((d++, a) << 1U) |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94098
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor
On Tue, 2020-03-17 at 14:27 +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
> > Jeff pointed out off-list that using:
> >
> >N: ... /* { dg-error {...} } */
> > N+1: /* { dg-error {...} "" { target *-*-* } .-1 } */
> >
> > led to two identical test names for line N. This was causing the
> > results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94131
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor
On 3/12/20 2:10 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On Mon, 2020-03-09 at 14:33 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 3/5/20 5:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On Fri, 2020-02-14 at 15:41 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Because attribute weakref introduces a kind of a definition, it can
only be applied to declarations of symbols
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3512dc0108afbed3bece2e9fa1719fb3ce1d73d9
commit r10-7267-g3512dc0108afbed3bece2e9fa1719fb3ce1d73d9
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3481
Chris Faylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cgf at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #125
On 3/18/20 11:58 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/16/20 1:39 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
In this PR, we are performing constexpr evaluation of a CONSTRUCTOR of type
union U which looks like
{.a=foo (&)}.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92264
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
For firefox with LTO we get:
$ wc -l /tmp/fbt
1645 /tmp/fbt
$ sort /tmp/fbt | uniq -c | sort -n | tac | head -n20
10 64 /tmp/libxul.so.J1HwqB.ltrans17.o CollectReports 103 0
10 64
That's a known to-do item – see "cvsweb/svn" under
https://sourceware.org/sourceware-wiki/MigrationWorkItems/?updated
Tobias
On 3/18/20 9:07 PM, Nicholas Krause via Gcc wrote:
On 3/18/20 3:49 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
I've been getting Error 403 (Forbidden - You don't have permission
On 3/18/20 3:49 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
I've been getting Error 403 (Forbidden - You don't have permission
to access /viewcvs on this server) following the Subversion links
in Bugzilla for some time now (they worked for me before the switch
to Git, but I'm not sure if they also did
I've been getting Error 403 (Forbidden - You don't have permission
to access /viewcvs on this server) following the Subversion links
in Bugzilla for some time now (they worked for me before the switch
to Git, but I'm not sure if they also did before the recent hardware
upgrade).
For example:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48060
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48060=edit
Reduced test-case without a warning
$ gcc -O2 -flto star.ii -shared
during IPA pass: cp
lto1: internal compiler error:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 10:12:00PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> > Btw, why not implement the neccessary vector init patterns?
>
> Power doesn't support 64bit vector size, it looks a bit hacky and
> confusing to introduce this kind of mode just for some optab requirement,
> but I admit the optab hack
Set /tmp first, then /var/tmp. /tmp is volatile on NetBSD and
/var/tmp not. This improves performance in the common use.
The downstream copy of GCC was patched for this preference
since 2015.
Remove occurence of /usr/tmp as it was never valid for NetBSD.
It was already activey disabled in the GCC
On March 18, 2020 6:20:29 PM GMT+01:00, Maxim Kuvyrkov
wrote:
>
>> On 17 Mar 2020, at 17:40, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> This adds a missing type conversion to build_fold_addr_expr and
>adjusts
>> fallout - build_fold_addr_expr was used as a convenience to build an
>> ADDR_EXPR but some
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Patrick Palka wrote:
> When diagnosing a constraint error, we currently try to print the constraint
> inside a diagnostic constraint context with its template arguments substituted
> in. If substitution fails, then we instead just print the dependent
> form, as in the the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> Hi Marin,
s/Marin/Martin
@Nicholas: As Marek said, please do not propose changes that are not completely
tested and that are more just quests. An issue like
When diagnosing a constraint error, we currently try to print the constraint
inside a diagnostic constraint context with its template arguments substituted
in. If substitution fails, then we instead just print the dependent
form, as in the the test case below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93589
John Downing changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jrdowning at yahoo dot com
--- Comment
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][8/5x]: Remaining MVE store intrinsics which
> stores an half word, word and double word to memory.
>
> Hello
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][7/5x]: MVE store intrinsics which stores
> byte,half word or word to memory.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
> Following
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:57:18PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I noticed this last night:
>
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/glibc-cvs/2020q1/069150.html
>
> Presumably that's the fix.
Or maybe for REAL_TYPE just care here about TYPE_MODE which should be all
that matters?
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][6/5x]: Remaining MVE load intrinsics which
> loads half word and word or double word from memory.
>
> Hello
On 3/18/20 8:30 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On Wed, 2020-03-18 at 14:25 +, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
The 03/13/2020 10:45, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 3/12/20 7:17 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020, Martin Sebor wrote:
Tested on x86_64-linux. Is this acceptable for GCC 10? How
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to gsdrtge6h from comment #7)
> Okay, but why the current layout is any better than the suggested layout.
Because these are not useful for anything really. The suggested layout might
require big
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #7 from gsdrtge6h at protonmail dot com ---
Okay, but why the current layout is any better than the suggested layout.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93931
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > Hi Marin,
> > I've not sure if this is correct but it does not ICE with this fix:
> > tree
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][5/5x]: MVE ACLE load intrinsics which load a
> byte, halfword, or word from memory.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also:
"GCC provides the built-in functions __builtin_setjmp and __builtin_longjmp
which are similar to, but not interchangeable with, the C library functions
setjmp and longjmp."
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> "This can make __builtin_setjmp and __builtin_longjmp more efficient than
> their library counterparts in some cases, but it can also cause incorrect
> and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-9.3.0/gcc/Nonlocal-Gotos.html#index-_005f_005fbuiltin_005fsetjmp
"You should use the standard C library functions declared in in user
code instead of the builtins"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][4/5x]: MVE load intrinsics with zero(_z)
> suffix.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
> Following patch is the rebased version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
__builtin_setjmp/__builtin_longjmp really should not be used. They are
normally used internally for Exception handling if dwarf2 eh is not enabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
--- Comment #1 from gsdrtge6h at protonmail dot com ---
Created attachment 48059
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48059=edit
longjmp part of the test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94218
Bug ID: 94218
Summary: Different __builtin_setjmp/__builtin_longjmp buffer
layout is suggested in case of cet.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88466
James Y Knight changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||foom at fuhm dot net
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94185
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Now smartmontools-7.0 builds successfully against gcc version 10.0.1 20200317
(experimental), commit 2e30d3e3e88b6a544074ff89de4974bc5e200e89.
Thank you for a superfast fix!
www.gam.cati...@gam.cat
___
Copyright
© 2020· Gam Consultoría y Formación· C/ Pirineus s/n (esq. Orriols) 17460
Celrà
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][3/5x]: MVE store intrinsics with predicated
> suffix.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
> Following patch is the rebased
www.gam.cati...@gam.cat
___
Copyright
© 2020· Gam Consultoría y Formación· C/ Pirineus s/n (esq. Orriols) 17460
Celrà
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][2/5x]: MVE load intrinsics.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
> Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
> (version v1)
Hi Srinath,
> -Original Message-
> From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> Sent: 18 March 2020 17:18
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH v2][ARM][GCC][1/5x]: MVE store intrinsics.
>
> Hello Kyrill,
>
> Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
> (version v1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93931
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/cp/parser.c.jj 2020-03-18 13:36:34.217840388 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c 2020-03-18 18:52:53.630586929 +0100
@@ -34059,6 +34059,8 @@ cp_parser_omp_var_list_no_open (cp_parse
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534333.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE load intrinsics with zero(_z)
suffix.
* ``_z`` (zero) which indicates false-predicated lanes are
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534354.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following Remaining MVE ACLE load intrinsics which load
an halfword,
word or double word from memory.
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534340.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE store intrinsics which stores an
halfword,
word or double word to memory.
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534335.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE store intrinsics which stores a
byte, halfword,
or word to memory.
vst1q_f32, vst1q_f16,
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534352.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE load intrinsics which load a byte,
halfword,
or word from memory.
vld1q_s8, vld1q_s32, vld1q_s16,
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534337.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE store intrinsics with predicated
suffix.
vstrbq_p_s8, vstrbq_p_s32, vstrbq_p_s16, vstrbq_p_u8,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Ever confirmed|0
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534334.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE store intrinsics.
vstrbq_scatter_offset_s8, vstrbq_scatter_offset_s32, vstrbq_scatter_offset_s16,
Hello Kyrill,
Following patch is the rebased version of v1.
(version v1) https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-November/534338.html
Hello,
This patch supports the following MVE ACLE load intrinsics.
vldrbq_gather_offset_u8, vldrbq_gather_offset_s8, vldrbq_s8, vldrbq_u8,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
Bug ID: 94217
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in ipa_find_agg_cst_for_param, at
ipa-prop.c:3467 since r10-7237-g4e3d3e40726e1b68
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94216
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #2)
> Jakub,
> I just tested your patch like this:
> ./gcc -B. comm.ii -c -g -O
>
> as mentioned by Martin Liska's report. It does not crash now so this
> should
1 - 100 of 227 matches
Mail list logo
