Re: Question about finding parameters in function bodies from SSA variables

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 3:45 PM Erick Ochoa wrote: > > Hello Richard, > > I'm still working on the points-to analysis and I am happy to say that > after reviewing the ipa-cp code I was able to generate summaries for > local variables, ssa variables, heap variables, global variables and > functions.

Re: [RFC] Adding a new attribute to function param to mark it as constant

On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote: On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote: On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kul

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Gabriel Paubert wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: >> Gabriel Paubert wrote: >> >> >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: >> >> .intel_syntax >> >> .text >>

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:47 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> Gabriel Paubert wrote: > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > >> >>

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 02:43:34PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> Gabriel Paubert wrote: > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > >> >>

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Hello, On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios > invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is acceptable, This claim would need to be proven in the wild. |argument| > 2**52 are already integer, and should

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Michael Matz wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios >> invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is acceptable, > > This claim would need to be proven in the wild. I should have

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Gabriel Paubert wrote: > On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 02:43:34PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: >> Gabriel Paubert wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote: [...] >> >> The whole idea behind these implementations is to get rid of loading >> >> flo

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Hello, On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > >> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the > >> spurios invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is > >> acceptable, > > > > This claim would need to be proven in the wild. > > I should have left the "wh

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

On August 6, 2021 4:32:48 PM GMT+02:00, Stefan Kanthak wrote: >Michael Matz wrote: > > >> Hello, >> >> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote: >> >>> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios >>> invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is accepta

Re: daily report on extending static analyzer project [GSoC]

> On 06-Aug-2021, at 4:39 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 20:27 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote: >> >> >>> On 05-Aug-2021, at 4:56 AM, David Malcolm >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 2021-08-04 at 21:32 +0530, Ankur Saini wrote: >>> >>> [...snip...] - From observation, a t

'hash_map>'

Hi! So I'm trying to do some C++... ;-) Given: /* A map from SSA names or var decls to record fields. */ typedef hash_map field_map_t; /* For each propagation record type, this is a map from SSA names or var decls to propagate, to the field in the record type that should b

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

Richard Biener wrote: > On August 6, 2021 4:32:48 PM GMT+02:00, Stefan Kanthak > wrote: >>Michael Matz wrote: >>> Btw, have you made speed measurements with your improvements? >> >>No. [...] >>If the constant happens to be present in L1 cache, it MAY load as fast >>as an immediate. >>BUT: on

Re: gcc_assert() and inhibit_libc

On 22/07/2021 14:15, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 2:45 PM Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, while testing this patch https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=gcc+enable_runtime_checking I noticed that __gcov_info_to_gcda() uses abort(). This is due to (from tsystem.h)

Re: Suboptimal code generated for __buitlin_trunc on AMD64 without SS4_4.1

On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote: > > I don't know what the standard says about NaNs in this case, I seem to > > remember that arithmetic instructions typically produce QNaN when one of > > the inputs is a NaN, whether signaling or not. > >

Re: 'hash_map>'

On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, 17:58 Thomas Schwinge, wrote: > Hi! > > So I'm trying to do some C++... ;-) > > Given: > > /* A map from SSA names or var decls to record fields. */ > typedef hash_map field_map_t; > > /* For each propagation record type, this is a map from SSA names or > var dec

Re: [RFC] Adding a new attribute to function param to mark it as constant

> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote: > > > The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the > > > second arg (__b), > > > should be an immediate value. > > > > Some

Re: [RFC] Adding a new attribute to function param to mark it as constant

On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote: On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote: On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote: On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote: On M

gcc-10-20210806 is now available

Snapshot gcc-10-20210806 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20210806/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch