On 8/25/24 03:48, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sat, Aug 24, 2024 at 6:19 PM Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Trying to use the value-range interface and functions I am running
into that ICE when using invert().
From what the sources suggest, invert() computes the complement of
the current set (the unio
On 2/15/23 14:50, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Hi,
While fixing PR 108354, I came across that
ssa_name_has_boolean_range calls get_range_query with cfun as the
argument but sometimes while in IPA passes cfun is currently nullptr.
The question should we check the argument before calling
get_range_que
On 5/27/22 02:38, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 10:36 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc wrote:
I am going to get to some documentation for ranger and its components
later this cycle.
I use to stick these sorts things on the wiki page, but i find that gets
out of date really quickly
I am going to get to some documentation for ranger and its components
later this cycle.
I use to stick these sorts things on the wiki page, but i find that gets
out of date really quickly. I could add more comments to the top of
each file, but that doesnt seem very practical for larger archit
On 12/14/21 18:55, Martin Sebor wrote:
Andrew, to improve the context of the late warnings I'm trying
to see how to get the execution path(s) leading from function
entry up to a statement. For example, for the code below I'd
like to "collect" and show the three conditionals in the context
of the
On 9/29/21 7:59 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Does it run like once a day/some-time-period, and if you note a regression,
narrow it down?
Configurations that track master branches have 3-day intervals. Configurations
that track release branches — 6 days. If a regression is detected it is
n
On 9/27/21 11:39 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov via Gcc wrote:
On 27 Sep 2021, at 16:52, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
[CCing Jeff and list for broader audience]
On 9/27/21 2:53 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Hi Aldy,
Your patch seems to slow down 471.omnetpp by 8% at -O3. Could you please take
a look if this is so
I dont't want to immediately open a PR, so I'll just ask about
testsuite/gcc.dg/pr83609.c.
the compilation string is
-O2 -fno-tree-forwprop -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-fre -fno-tree-pre
-fno-code-hoisting
Which passes as is.
if I however add -fno-tree-vrp as well, then it looks like dead
On 10/27/20 1:46 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Jakub Jelinek via Gcc writes:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 01:18:03PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod via Gcc wrote:
I was looking at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97596
and the ranger is constructing some 128 bit constants and calling
I was looking at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97596
and the ranger is constructing some 128 bit constants and calling
wide_int_to_tree to turn them into trees.
In particular, it starts with the value
p r.lower_bound(0)
{ = {val = {-65535, 9223372036854775807,
140737488257608}
We originally intended to start pushing ranger code into trunk shortly
after the start of stage 1, but of course.. delays, delays :-)
So here is the latest status/changes since last fall and our proposed
time-line going forward. I'll do the executive summary here, and more
details at each sub
11 matches
Mail list logo
