Also, returning a single object file restricts the possibilities.
The
design of WHOPR, as I understand it, permits creating several
different object files in parallel based on a fast analysis of which
code should be compiled together. When the linker supports
concurrent
linking, it will be
On Jun 4, 2008, at 6:09 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote:
On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nick Kledzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jun 4, 2008, at 5:00 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Nick Kledzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't claim our current implementation is bug free, but
I can hand you more than the testcases i've given so far. There is
tons of code out there that would benefit from straight line
vectorization.
I'm interested in these test cases. Thanks!
In fact, we have some that gets written in loop form
right now just so it gets vectorized!
May be loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00167.html
This patch looks wrong to me. I don't understand how it could be
correct in the presence of __attribute__ ((aligned (N))). It checks
TYPE_PACKED but not TYPE_ALIGN or TYPE_USER_ALIGN. The default hook
assumes that objects larger
Is there a reason why op0 is V4SF
It is destination so, yes this is wrong.
and op1 is V4SI (and not V8HI)?
condition should be v4si, but it is not op1. So this is also not correct.
And also, why not use if_then_else instead of unspec (in all vcond's)?
I did not try that path. May be I
As for proposal to revert the aliasing fixes on the 4.2, IMHO aliasing
bugs are pretty nasty it is hard to find a option to work around because
alias info is used in many optimizations.
All bugs we are talking about can be worked around by using
-fno-strict-aliasing.
FWIW, in Apple
* How do we compare the costs of if-converted vectorized code to
it's scalar counterpart?
o It may be convenient to calculate scalar cost during if-conversion itself.
o It is possible that size of two sibling blocks (Block_A Block_B)
does not match at the beginning of tree-ssa level if
On 2/20/07, Eric Botcazou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, in Apple distributed GCC 4.0.x, strict-aliasing is disabled by
default when -O? is used because it breaks too much existing
code (not just Apple internal code).
Much more than in 3.x?
I do not have data to answer this appropriately (
what happens with the data previously loaded by a previous pch include file?
I can't figure out why every GTY()-ed global data (extern or static) should
be overwritten at each PCH inclusion, but then maybe I am wrong.
Couple of big limiations of GCC PCH :
- Only one PCH can be loaded during
Hi,
I'm trying to know more about how messages are send to the
objects in objective-C, how they are store,...
In which structures en how?
Where should I look in the source code of gcc to know it?
I looked in libobjc but I'm a bit lost.
Thanks very much
See How Messaging Works document at
Hello,
for project http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PreservingLoops, I am considering
introducing a tree LOOP_HEADER with single argument N (number of
iterations of the loop), that would be present in IL at the beginning of
header of each loop. I have following motivations:
1) One of the goals of the
On 10/25/06, Zdenek Dvorak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
So, the passes that maniuplate loop structure need to know about
LOOP_HEADER and others do not need to worry about LOOP_HEADER.
More acurately, the passes that manipulate the cfg. Right now most of
these passes don't even know they
On 10/25/06, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and seeing the reaction of people,
I probably won't use it. The main reason for considering to use
the tree node for me was the possibility to make the number of iterations
of the loop as its operand, so that I would not need to worry
On 10/25/06, Steven Bosscher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you would mark n_1 with TREE_USED, and never let it be removed?
What would happen if e.g. the entire loop turns out to be dead code?
Or if the loop is rewritten (e.g. vectorized) in a way that changes
the number of iterations of the loop?
Can these type casts (from uchar to schar and back) be cleaned away
by some pass before vectorization, or do we need to teach the vectorizer
to ignore such type casts?
This was considered as tree-combiner's responsibility. However, I do not
know what is the current state and plan of
Dorit Nuzman wrote:
most of the links you listed are 4.2 projects that haven't been reviewed
(indeed, they also haven't been pinged very frequently - only about once a
month I think). these will be resubmitted relative to updated mainline (for
4.3 I guess).
Dan Berlin created patch queue so
I think this patch by Zdenek - vectorizing function calls - is related:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01655.html
(would need to be extended to cover this case).
Yes, extending Zdenek's patch to recognize built-in is a good idea.
However, in case of compiler inserted built-in
[off-topic]
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Dan Berlin created patch queue so that we do not have to ping patches.
Actually it was created for a different reason.
From: Andrew Pinski pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 21:18:39
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 10:34 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
We can allocate space in numbering for vendor extensions.
What happens when you compile two sources with two different
compilers and they
use
Tom Tromey wrote:
Dan It also has almost zero hope of working over multiple compiler versions,
Dan being future proof in general, and not having other compiler vendors
Dan fight over message number namespace.
The maintenance issue is a major one. This document definitely needs
to address this,
Tom Tromey wrote:
Devang In the case of dead code we could use _msg. However, _cmd is
Devang available to trigger some actions in tools that use this
Devang information. If we let our imaginations run wild then for
Devang example, lead developer towards __restrict documentation
Devang (i.e.
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 7, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Devang Patel wrote:
Is it constructive (and appropriate? but hey I'm DWARF newbie myself)
to declare
DWARF standard limited and full of mistakes ?
No, I am saying that dwarf2 is supposed to be stable and adding stuff
is not likely
going
Andrew Pinski wrote:
No, you said it has limitations and it is mistake to allow vendor
extensions in DWARF.
My exact words were:
Not my fault and not really related because we are creating a new standard and
don't want to repeat this mistake, messages don't have this issue.
I was not
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:29:44AM -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
And string does not answer localization issue, however for numbers at least
there is one precedent to follow.
I think this discussion has gotten totally sidetracked.
I agree.
When I said
I
Tom Tromey wrote:
Devang == Devang Patel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Devang Since messages are represented using a number, how about using
Devang one category bit to identify command message vs display message ?
Devang Command message is a message where tools, reading opt diary
Tom Tromey wrote:
Devang == Devang Patel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Devang This version removes internal radar numbers and replaces s/
Devang DW_AT_APPLE.../DW_AT_GNU...
I read this. I'm not anywhere near an expert in dwarf or anything
related to this proposal, so please bear
Tom Tromey wrote:
* Why put the optimization diary into the object file?
Why not just have -Wdiary and print it along with all the warnings?
(I'm sure there's an answer to this, it would just be nice if it
were in the document...)
These are not warnings and they should not cause build
Andrew Pinski wrote:
These are not warnings and they should not cause build failures
when -Werror is used, hence warnings are not suitable medium to
communicate this info.
There is a third type of diagnostic in GCC which gets not much
use at all. It is called note. It might be
Andrew Pinski wrote:
Andrew Pinski wrote:
These are not warnings and they should not cause build failures
when -Werror is used, hence warnings are not suitable medium to
communicate this info.
There is a third type of diagnostic in GCC which gets not much
use at all. It is
Is this what you want ?
yes :)
Thanks,
-
Devang
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Devang Patel wrote:
We can allocate space in numbering for vendor extensions.
What happens when you compile two sources with two different compilers
and they
use the same number for vendor extension?
What happens when another compiler
Hello,
On 3/13/06, Thomas Yeh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
I am trying to use the latest autovectorization gcc code to generate
functionally correct SSE instructions, and I have the following questions:
Where is the latest stable gcc version with autovector? (is this 4.1.0?)
and
On 2/22/06, Mike Stump [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 22, 2006, at 10:24 AM, Ian S. Nelson wrote:
It looks like there are attributes to help optimize some functions
further but are there any to not optimize at all?
In general, no; however, Dale did up a patch to control this sort of
thing
On 2/22/06, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a note from the person who keeps tabs on a lot of stuff. There
is already a project which is written or started to write to do this.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Function%20Level%20Control%20of%20Optimizations.
I did not know about this
On 11/19/05, Joseph S. Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Chris Lattner wrote:
1. The build system is taught about C++ code.
With toplevel bootstrap this will bootstrap libstdc++ so that the compiler
ends up linked with the new libstdc++ not the (in general
On 11/16/05, Steven Bosscher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 15:35, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
We'd like to suggest a few new tree-codes/optabs in order to express the
extraction and merging of elements from/to vectors.
Watch out for tree code starvation:
$
On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
doing or done this themselves can attest, it takes a long time and a
lot of RAM and a whole ton of I/O.
Yes, it takes very long time, few hours before I
On 11/8/05, Daniel Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It will simply tell you you don't have access :)
However, it is rejecting local branch creation also.
---
$ svk ls /svkgcc/gcc/local_branches
Path /gcc/local_branches is not a versioned directory
bardoli:~ bardoli$ svk mkdir
On 11/8/05, Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't this, creating local branches, is a local operation ?
//gcc is a mirrored location. You have to create your branches outside
of there; try /svkgcc/local-gcc in your example.
Yes, this works.
Thanks,
-
Devang
I've never used subversion before but I have subversion book on my desk.
It's time to open it very first time!
You say that it is easier to manage multiple branches using
subversion. This is enough to get my vote in favor of this transition.
My question is - What's the plan regarding cvs
On 10/12/05, Diego Novillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 10 October 2005 19:25, Steve Ellcey wrote:
Could we just have -fwrite-ipo create a '.o' file that contains the
intermediate representation (instead of being a real object file).
Then when the linker is called it would call the
On 10/7/05, Steve Ellcey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
In the meantime I would be interested in any opinions people have on
what level we should be writing things out at. Generic? Gimple? RTL?
(Just kidding on that last one.) Also any opinions on what format to
write things out in;
, 2005-09-22 at 18:49 -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:32 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005 11:25 AM, Zdenek Dvorak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4. Other ideas?
Preserving the information about loops throughout the
optimizations, and
just keeping this information
On Sep 22, 2005, at 2:32 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005 11:25 AM, Zdenek Dvorak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4. Other ideas?
Preserving the information about loops throughout the
optimizations, and
just keeping this information attached at the loop description
would by
far
GCC routinely puts on the fly type description in other stabs. For
example,
006c - 00 0002 PSYM argv:p(0,2)=*(0,3)=*(0,4)=r(0,4);0;127;
Now when this PSYM stab is discarded by linker the useful type info
is lost. This happens a lot in -feliminate-unused-debug-symbols mode.
It
On Jul 23, 2005, at 8:44 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Actually, I think the best fix would be just not to set
DECL_IGNORED_P in the first place, and let the debug-generators
sort it out.
OK. I'll see how dbxout reacts.
-
Devang
C++ does not generate debug info for anonymous aggregates in cases
like :
class A
{
public:
typedef struct
{
int d;
} mystruct;
mystruct data;
};
This is because FE sets DECL_IGNORED_P bit. This causes debug info
generator to
skip debug info when invoked through
On Jul 11, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 06:11:58PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote:
Yeah, Devang didn't present what we're doing here on the debug side
too well. We're giving up a bit of information from within gdb --
it won't know what constructors and
Our analysis suggests that reducing certain stabs info for C++ ctors/
dtors can lead to significant final size reduction without noticeable
change in quality of debugging (in STABS world, at least).
For example,
class Base1 {
public: int x;
Base1(int i) { x = i; }
int getx (void) {
On Jul 1, 2005, at 8:51 AM, Paul Schlie wrote:
As in general it seems that as the compiler knows what it needs to
know to
enable ideal loop optimization, why not simply have it assert: if
it knew x,
then it could do y? For example, if given something like:
for (i = x; i y; i++){ ... }
On Jun 14, 2005, at 1:01 AM, Matthew Sachs wrote:
And that's why someone (possibly me, ideally someone with more
hardware to spare) should do runs against FSF mainline.
One thing to watch out is the APPLE LOCAL patches in back-end/code
gen area, particularly related to alignment and other
On Jun 9, 2005, at 3:29 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Hello,
I have some questions about the use of check_vect() in the vectorizer
testsuite:
1) All the ifcvt tests (vect-ifcvt*) seem to require SSE2
capability to be
vectorized but they do not call check_vect(). Is this a bug? They
surely
On Jun 9, 2005, at 8:24 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
So, the point is that you cannot select between compile-time/run-
time based
on a target triplet check, at least for this target. What do you
suggest?
All the other tests use check_vect() exactly for this reason, as
far as I
can see, so it
On Jun 5, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Here are three bugs I'd really like to see fixed.
* 21528: SRA and/or aliasing problem.
* 21847: DCE over-eagerness.
* 20928: IA32 ICE.
* 19523: [4.0/4.1 Regression] DBX_USE_BINCL support broken in the C++
compiler
19523 is a nasty
On May 10, 2005, at 1:37 PM, Kazu Hirata wrote:
Now, what would be the right fix here? Something like this?
case GOTO_EXPR:
break;
Just remove handling of GOTO_EXPR here and in if_convertible_stmt_p().
-
Devang
On May 4, 2005, at 11:49 PM, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
GCC 4.1 is going rather well thus far.
Technically, Stage 1 ended on April 25th, though I failed to announce
that. There are a few stage 1 tasks that have not made it in yet,
according to the Wiki:
# Autovectorization Enhancements
Items 1.4, 2.1,
On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
1. make bootstrap on a 2.4ghz p4 takes 90 minutes for me as of
yesterday.
2. Building XLC with (C,C++,Fortran) and a single backend takes
roughly
the same time as building GCC. And they aren't three staging, AFAIK.
..ain't the same ballpark, it
On Apr 28, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:23 -0700, Devang Patel wrote:
On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
1. make bootstrap on a 2.4ghz p4 takes 90 minutes for me as of
yesterday.
2. Building XLC with (C,C++,Fortran) and a single backend takes
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:22 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
Though of course, this doesn't mean that we can't have an option to
control it. -Wno-cast-qual doesn't seem like the right choice, as
there is no user cast here. Maybe something like -Wno-discard-
qual, where -Wdiscard-qual is the default.
I
On Apr 19, 2005, at 11:51 AM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:29 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
I notice that these are pedwarns,
In that case, we can enable it only when -pedantic is used (like
many pedwarns) ?
Consider this small modification to your testcase.
const
From line_map comment at (libcpp/include/line-map.h)
/* Physical source file TO_FILE at line TO_LINE at column 0 is
represented
by the logical START_LOCATION. TO_LINE+L at column C is
represented by
START_LOCATION+(L*(1column_bits))+C, as long as C
(1column_bits),
What happens when
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:29 PM, James E Wilson wrote:
Devang Patel wrote:
warning: initialization discards qualifiers from pointer
target type
This warning can not be disabled using -Wno-cast-qual
(or any other warning flags). Is it intentional ?
It looks like we have been doing it this way
warning: initialization discards qualifiers from pointer target
type
This warning can not be disabled using -Wno-cast-qual
(or any other warning flags). Is it intentional ?
Otherwise I'll prepare patch.
Thanks,
-
Devang
const char *a( void )
{
return abc;
}
int main( void )
{
On Apr 14, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
The device driver case seems like a more plausible objection to
me, but I'd
like to see an example there, too.
Perhaps Windows? I'd think Windows is chok full of device
drivers written in C++.
Here in Mac OS X land, many device drivers are
On Apr 8, 2005, at 1:35 AM, vivek sukumaran wrote:
Hello everybody,
I need benchmark programs for my project.
Does anybody have or know the links to C benchmarks
that can be compiled using gcc?
Thanking you,
You question is not clear and this is probably
wrong list for whatever you are looking
On Apr 8, 2005, at 10:08 AM, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 13:04 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
When we rescan the operands, we get a different set of V_MAY_DEFS,
specifically we lose the V_MAY_DEF for SFT.3_20.
Why?
It should be copying subvars to the new vectorizer variable too.
At
On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:36 PM, Virender Kashyap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Dale Johannesen wrote:
The command line you show is the built compiler trying to build
gcc's library.
It doesn't work, which means there is a bug in your changes.
actually it was working fine before even with changes.
but
On Apr 3, 2005, at 3:58 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
so the question
is do similar opportunities still exist?
GCC wiki has a laundry list @ http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Speedup%20areas
-
Devang
On Mar 30, 2005, at 10:36 PM, Per Bothner wrote:
* Note that we compile the gch file as it were the main file
- i.e. it has the MAIN_FILE_P property, and it is not included
from any file.
Another side effect, it bypasses system header check.
gcc -x c-header /usr/include/stdio.h
Here, stdio.h
On Feb 27, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
In stark contrast, i believe it is a very good idea for us to be over
organized about this. As for judging importance, the release manager
has always judged what is important for a given release, based on
general goals.
I agree. IMO taking one
Would it be OK, if this warnings are disabled for system headers ?
Thanks,
-
Devang
--- c-decl.c.~1~2005-01-06 19:26:09.0 -0800
+++ c-decl.c2005-02-15 11:59:48.0 -0800
@@ -1169,11 +1169,15 @@ diagnose_mismatched_decls (tree newdecl,
*oldtypep = oldtype =
71 matches
Mail list logo
