I was making tags in libiberty and noticed it just didn’t work. :-(
This is one easy way to fix it.
Ok?
diff --git a/libiberty/Makefile.in b/libiberty/Makefile.in
index f06cc69..876fab2 100644
--- a/libiberty/Makefile.in
+++ b/libiberty/Makefile.in
@@ -409,8 +409,9 @@ stamp-noasandir:
etags
On Jun 18, 2015, at 1:35 PM, Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net writes:
+ cd $(srcdir) etags `for i in $(CFILES); do echo $(srcdir)/$$i ;
done`
This doesn't work with a relative $(srcdir).
Sure it does. I had tested with:
srcdir
On Jun 15, 2015, at 12:55 PM, Andres Tiraboschi
andres.tirabos...@tallertechnologies.com wrote:
Hi, do you know where is the .exp file for the tests in
.../gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn?
I can't find it.
find srcdir -name \*.exp -print will show you all of them. You’ll discover
that a .exp
On Jun 12, 2015, at 8:25 PM, Jack Howarth howarth.at@gmail.com wrote:
The attached patch revises the tests for the filds and fists
mnemonics to use the assembly...
filds mem(%rip); fists mem(%rip)
Okay for gcc trunk?
Fine from a darwin perspective, but I would like an x86 binutils
On Jun 5, 2015, at 4:02 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 02/06/15 20:40, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On June 2, 2015 5:38:06 PM GMT+02:00, Bernhard
Reutner-Fischerrep.dot@gmail.com wrote:
On June 2, 2015 2:08:47 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Biener
rguent...@suse.de wrote:
So, the arm memcpy code of aligned data isn’t as good as it can be.
void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, unsigned int n);
void foo(char *dst, int i) {
memcpy (dst, i, sizeof (i));
}
generates horrible code, but, it we are willing to notice the src or the
destination are aligned, we can
On May 20, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Lawrence Velázquez v...@larryv.me wrote:
2015-05-15 Lawrence Velázquez v...@larryv.me
PR target/63810
* gcc/config/darwin-c.c (version_components): New global enum.
(parse_version, version_as_legacy_macro)
(version_as_modern_macro,
On May 28, 2015, at 2:02 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
Does anybody have a better suggestion?
directive not at the start of a loop at %C
directive not followed by a loop at %C
I prefer either of these. I have a slight preference for the first.
Mike, did you
On May 18, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Alan Lawrence alan.lawre...@arm.com wrote:
Simulators such as qemu report the presence of fork (it's in glibc) but
generally do not support synchronization primitives between threads, so any
tests using fork are unreliable.
Hum, I have a simulator (binutils/sim)
On May 14, 2015, at 11:42 PM, Lawrence Velázquez v...@larryv.me wrote:
As described in PR target/63810, this addresses several problems
With this change, trunk matches the behavior of Apple LLVM Compiler
6.1.0 on 8,451 of 8,464 generated test inputs. (The discrepancies are
due to a bug in
On May 15, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com wrote:
This patch fixes testcase thumb1-far-jump-2.c to confirm to newer compilation
defaults.
Is patch ok?
Ok.
On May 14, 2015, at 8:30 AM, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@gdcproject.org wrote:
On another note, I've found out why the remaining 20 symbols in my 75k
sample failed. They don't fail at all! It's just that they were all
greater than 33,000 characters in length, and my test used c++filt,
which trims
On May 12, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
It really depends on the complexity of getting LRA working for the target and
given what I saw when looking at the port, I don't believe it should be much
work.
LRA should default to on? Only preexisting ports about ask for, and
On May 11, 2015, at 4:05 AM, sameera sameera.deshpa...@imgtec.com wrote:
+(define_insn *join2_loadhi
+ [(set (match_operand:SI 0 register_operand =r)
+ (any_extend:SI (match_operand:HI 1 non_volatile_mem_operand m)))
+ (set (match_operand:SI 2 register_operand =r)
+ (any_extend:SI
On May 7, 2015, at 5:39 PM, Aldy Hernandez al...@redhat.com wrote:
So, I don’t feel there is anything in there for me to review, I’d like the
front-end maintainer to review.
dearly-testsuite.patch
Description: Binary data
On May 7, 2015, at 5:38 PM, Aldy Hernandez al...@redhat.com wrote:
Ok.
On May 7, 2015, at 4:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:26:57PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
As reported in the PR, with the addition of all those OpenACC tests,
libgomp make check times have skyrocketed since the testsuite is still
run sequentially.
Even
On Apr 12, 2015, at 11:11 AM, Jack Howarth howarth.at@gmail.com wrote:
The attached patch is a back port of the change from
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revisionrevision=211067 for
gcc-4_9-branch. Bootstrap and regression tested on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 with Xcode 6.3. Okay for
On Apr 26, 2015, at 10:55 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org
gcc/ChangeLog:
2015-04-27 Trevor Saunders tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org
* bb-reorder.c (HAVE_return): Don't check if its undefined.
* defaults.h (gen_simple_return):
On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:03 PM, Jim Wilson jim.wil...@linaro.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
Looks good to me. Please install if you haven't already done so.
Thanks, I checked in the patch. I'm not maintainer of anything
currently,
Actually, you
On Apr 28, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Jack Howarth howarth.at@gmail.com wrote:
The attached patch adds support for the -rdynamic compiler flag
on darwin12 and later.
Okay for gcc trunk?
Jack was able to confirm that this doesn’t change darwin11.
Ok.
On Apr 21, 2015, at 9:07 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
I think I want to make a distinction between
(A) classic C gotchas, like the one in my mail and the:
if (cond);
stmt;
one you mentioned above
vs
(B) wrong/inconsistent indentation.
I think (A) is
With FUSION you might get farther. See the arm port as I recall.
The quick overview, FUSION allows instructions that are not contiguous to be
paired up and fused together. it was built for load/load store/store combining.
On Apr 19, 2015, at 10:09 PM, sameera sameera.deshpa...@imgtec.com
On Apr 20, 2015, at 3:16 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Iain Sandoe i...@codesourcery.com wrote:
After having fixed the typo, regtesting went without regression.
I have done a bootstrap on i686-darwin10 with the amended patch - slow
machine, so
On Apr 20, 2015, at 6:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
add_AT_wide is the only add_AT_* that doesn't clear or otherwise initialize
dw_attr_val.val_entry field, so it contains random garbage, which isn't
desirable when ggc walks it during collections.
Supposedly this omission
On Apr 17, 2015, at 1:05 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 14, 2015, at 8:07 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all
On Apr 17, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Steve Ellcey sell...@imgtec.com wrote:
struct link_namespaces *ns = _dl_ns[nsid];
(nsid != 0) ? (void) (0) : bad (nsid != 0”);
Without disagreeing with the fact this looks like a bug, ideally, the two lines
above would be switched:
c++98:
If both the pointer
On Apr 14, 2015, at 8:07 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
I can confirm that the most current patch bootstraps on
x86_64-apple-darwin14 and that all of the new tests show up as
unsupported in the test suite.
Jack
I am re-posting this patch. OK for trunk?
If Jack is happy,
On Apr 16, 2015, at 8:01 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
Attached is a work-in-progress patch for a new
-Wmisleading-indentation
warning I've been experimenting with, for GCC 6.
Seems like a nice idea in general.
Does it also handle:
if (cone);
stmt;
? Would be good to add
On Apr 10, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Aldy Hernandez al...@redhat.com wrote:
KFAIL: gdb.cp/oranking.exp: p foo4(a) (PRMS: gdb/12098)
---
KPASS: gdb.cp/oranking.exp: p foo4(a) (PRMS gdb/12098)
20065c20065
KFAIL: gdb.cp/oranking.exp: p foo101(abc) (PRMS: gdb/12098)
---
KPASS: gdb.cp/oranking.exp:
On Mar 26, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Steve Ellcey sell...@imgtec.com wrote:
I am looking at ways of dynamically realigning the runtime stack in GCC.
Ick, sorry to hear it. The best approach is to just tell the powers that be
that an abi roll is the best, cheapest and most reliable way to fix it. [
On Mar 18, 2015, at 2:55 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is the updated patch with testcases. Tested on Linux/x86. OK
for trunk?
This patch needs global reviewer approval (I have added Jakub to CC)
and Darwin maintainer approval.
So, my concern would be this, does the bug
On Mar 14, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
On March 14, 2015 2:02:38 PM GMT+01:00, Alan Modra amo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll also throw together a testcase or three. For execute tests I'm
thinking of using sbrk to locate an odd sized struct such that
On Mar 14, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
newlib doesn’t have mmap. Indeed, some machines will never have mmap.
newlib has sbrk.
Still, I think it is preferrable to test with mmap…
I don’t see anything wrong with going the target mmap direction… my post was
On Mar 8, 2015, at 10:38 AM, Iain Sandoe i...@codesourcery.com wrote:
+Ian
+ ping
So, all the darwinness of the patch looks fine to me. One maintainer down,
just need libiberty approval.
If the work becomes too bothersome, the comment out the line and say, # does’t
work with libcc1 approach
On Mar 8, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com wrote:
In general, the GCC manual documents the version of the compiler that it goes
with. New features are being added all the time, and it's not terribly
useful to users to document that such-and-such a feature isn't
On Jan 30, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 30, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
Use error_at, and %u directly in the format.
Done.
Ping?
Index: ada/gcc-interface/trans.c
On Feb 26, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
this patch adds proc profopt-target-cleanup, which cleans up profile files,
while also taking dg-additional-sources into account.
Using profopt-target-cleanup in profopt-execute, we cleanup f.i.
On Feb 26, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
This patch adds cleaning up of uninteresting leftover coverage files in case
of xfail, f.i. for gcc.misc-tests/gcov-13.c.
OK for stage4 trunk?
Ok.
On Feb 26, 2015, at 9:07 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
We'll need a more recent version of sphinx than
1.0 though (at least 1.2.2, or even better, 1.3b2 which is the version we use
at AdaCore).
The specific version of sphinx in use for gcc.gnu.org is 1.0.8
So, if people check
On Feb 26, 2015, at 3:01 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
Attached patch introduces a new cleanup procedure to remove
-fdump-final-insns dumps.
2015-02-26 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
* lib/gcc-dg.exp (cleanup-final-insns-dump): New procedure.
* g++.dg/opt/dump1.C
On Feb 25, 2015, at 1:13 PM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/25/2015 12:02 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ if (flag_eliminate_dwarf2_dups)
+{
+ warning (0, ignoring unimplemented option -feliminate-dwarf2-dups);
+ flag_eliminate_dwarf2_dups = 0;
+}
I think we
On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:25:54AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
this patch reverses the abort logic in pr30957-1.c, such that it aborts on
failure rather than on success.
That sounds really weird. From the description it looks
On Feb 20, 2015, at 4:36 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 20-02-15 10:42, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:25:54AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
this patch reverses the abort logic in pr30957-1.c, such that it aborts on
failure rather than on success.
That
On Feb 20, 2015, at 10:12 AM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:25:54AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
this patch reverses the abort logic in pr30957-1.c, such that it aborts on
failure rather than
On Feb 20, 2015, at 6:36 AM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
I assumed that nobody would build an offloading compiler with
--enable-languages
other than c,c++,fortran[,lto].
:-) You should try objc and obj-c++… With some luck, they might just work out
of the box.
On Feb 20, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/19/15 10:27, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
the attached patch makes the hoist-register-pressure testcases to work
with -m31 on 64 bit.
Ok to apply?
Bye,
-Andreas-
2015-02-19 Andreas Krebbel andreas.kreb...@de.ibm.com
On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
2015-02-12 Ilya Enkovich ilya.enkov...@intel.com
PR tree-optimization/65002
* gcc.dg/pr65002.C: New.
This test should have gone into g++.dg.
Into g++.dg/opt or g++.dg/ipa in particular.
Pre-approved if
path for libstdc++.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/ubsan-dg.exp
to gcc-4_9-branch for 4.9.3?
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-02/msg01535.html
shows that we need it.
Jack
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Mike Stump
On Feb 11, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 09:10 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
On Feb 9, 2015, at 7:11 AM, Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com wrote:
The following patch makes atomic-op-consume.c XFAIL
Is this patch ok?
Ok.
I’d shorten
On Feb 11, 2015, at 4:24 AM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
The following patch splits the test into C and C++ test cases, so
hopefully fixing the issue. Ok for trunk?
2015-02-11 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* g++.dg/ubsan/shift-1.C: New test.
*
On Feb 10, 2015, at 8:06 AM, James Greenhalgh james.greenha...@arm.com wrote:
As is already done for mips and hppa, we should XFAIL this test on
AArch64 as we don't currently use the store_by_pieces infrastructure.
For this patch, either this is obvious or a target person should weigh in. I’d
On Feb 9, 2015, at 7:11 AM, Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com wrote:
The following patch makes atomic-op-consume.c XFAIL
Is this patch ok?
Ok.
I’d shorten the comment above the xfail to be exceedingly short:
/* PR59448 consume not implemented yet */
The reason is the brain can process
On Feb 8, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Jack Howarth howarth.at@gmail.com wrote:
This last version of the patch bootstraps and passes the test suite
without regressions on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
Ok for the darwin bits.
On Feb 6, 2015, at 4:23 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki ma...@linux-mips.org wrote:
This consideration made me realise I've had a patch outstanding for some
10 years to convert all the `BAL x' instructions there to `BLTZAL $0, x'.
This has always been a good idea in case implementations recognised the
On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Matthew Fortune matthew.fort...@imgtec.com wrote:
Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net writes:
On Feb 6, 2015, at 4:23 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki ma...@linux-mips.org
wrote:
This consideration made me realise I've had a patch outstanding for
some
10 years to convert all
On Feb 4, 2015, at 2:28 AM, Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
On Jan 28, 2015, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 28, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
wrote:
* Remove the definition
On Feb 2, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
Untested draft patch
I looked it over, seems to slot in nicely.
+ gfc_error (%GCC unroll% directive does not commence a loop at %C”);
So, don’t like commence here.
On Jan 31, 2015, at 1:55 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
What about the -Wcomment question?
I don’t consider it linked in anyway to the patch at hand. I’m not a big fan
of the default flags being much different than the flags the user normally
sees. That said,
On Jan 31, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
On January 31, 2015 10:53:39 AM GMT+01:00, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello!
Reminds me of just auto-wiping dump files:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02506.html
Mike, WDYT?
Ok.
On Jan 30, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
Use error_at, and %u directly in the format.
Done.
Index: ada/gcc-interface/trans.c
===
--- ada/gcc-interface/trans.c (revision 220084)
+++
On Jan 29, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
The patch is OK for GCC 6
We will be releasing 5.x compilers for the next
On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, I kinda discounted that as it went by it seems. It seems most
other players go the other way, as the numbers get large, the first one
fixes, and then they add numbers at the bottom. Thanks.
You obviously
On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:52 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com
wrote:
This last test is still puzzling me.
As it is to me. The reason it seems like they were going for in the code was
due to wrapping, but wrapping should only happen at something relating to the
bit size of the
I have a port that has:
(insn 47 46 48 18 (parallel [
(unspec_volatile:DI [
(const_int 128 [0x80])
(const_int 6 [0x6])
] UNSPECV_SPECIAL_OP)
(set (mem/v:BLK (scratch:DI) [0 A8])
(unspec:BLK [
On Jan 30, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:45:26AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
I have a port that has:
(insn 47 46 48 18 (parallel [
(unspec_volatile:DI [
(const_int 128 [0x80])
(const_int 6
On Jan 29, 2015, at 1:56 PM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/29/2015 01:53 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
PR libffi/64855
* testsuite/lib/libffi.exp: Don't set targetabis on darwin.
Ok.
Committed revision 220264.
On Jan 29, 2015, at 11:39 AM, David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com wrote:
This is a reasonable change, but please ask a vect maintainer like
Richi or a testsuite maintainer to approve.
So, my perspective, looks usual and customary.
I do worry about the turing complete nature of testing and the
On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Mike Stump wrote:
+ if (!INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (expr))
+ || TREE_CODE (expr) != INTEGER_CST
+ || (lunroll = tree_to_shwi (expr)) 0
+ || lunroll USHRT_MAX
On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
The patch is OK for GCC 6
We will be releasing 5.x compilers for the next decade?! Does he really have
to wait 10 years?
Why not, just OK for stage 1?
On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:06 PM, Joseph Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Mike Stump wrote:
+@item #pragma GCC unroll @var{n}
+@cindex pragma GCC unroll @var{n}
@var contains the name of a metasyntactic variable; it doesn't make sense
for quotes to be included
On Jan 28, 2015, at 4:58 AM, Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Thoughts?
So the timeout for slow things can be increased:
# More time is needed
set_board_info
On Jan 27, 2015, at 8:24 AM, Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com wrote:
This patch fixes aarch64/atomic-op-consume.c test to expect safe LDAXR
instruction to be generated when __ATOMIC_CONSUME semantics is requested.
Did you see:
/* Workaround for Bugzilla 59448. GCC doesn't track consume
On Jan 28, 2015, at 12:52 PM, Jack Howarth howarth.at@gmail.com wrote:
The attached patch solves PR64635 for those targets which produce a
libgomp-plugin-host_nonshm shared library with a suffix other than
.so.1”.
Nice...
On Jan 28, 2015, at 1:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Please add
PR libgomp/64635
to the ChangeLog entry.
Ok with that change.
Committed revision 220218.
On Jan 28, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
There are two ways to fix this:
* Remove the definition of _XOPEN_SOURCE completely. This is slightly
more risky, but more future-proof since defining features test macros
has been an endless source of trouble
On Jan 27, 2015, at 10:08 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
We're still going to need the changes to the heuristic to enable 4 insn
combinations
Yeah, I’ve love for a masters student to come up with a sane way to do 16 or
less and enhance gcc to do that. Things like, oh, this pattern is a
On Jan 28, 2015, at 9:51 AM, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Going forward we can [ … ] xfail the test case pending a proper solution to
59448 ?
Mike do you prefer one of the other two approaches ?
I’d xfail the test case and mark with the fix consume PR. If we don’t have
On Jan 27, 2015, at 7:10 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch introduces a new effective target check and adds it to the
pr64612.C
- if comdat groups aren't used, there is no guarantee that the D2 dtor will
be emitted always alongside of D1 dtor.
Bootstrapped/regtested on
Jason, Joseph, this is stage 1 material (unless someone else wants to try and
make an argument for it sooner), if you could review the parser (frontend)
bits, that would be wonderful. The mid-end, and back-end bits Richard was
reviewing.
On Jan 8, 2015, at 4:45 AM, Richard Biener
I missed including the documentation patch in the last set. :-( Here it is:
Index: extend.texi
===
--- extend.texi (revision 220084)
+++ extend.texi (working copy)
@@ -17881,6 +17881,17 @@ void ignore_vec_dep (int *a, int k, int
On Jan 26, 2015, at 3:43 AM, Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com wrote:
+# Again, the jit is a special case, with nested subdirectories
+# below jit, and with some non-HTML files (.png images from us,
+# plus .js and .css supplied by sphinx).
+for file in $(find jit \
+-name
On Jan 25, 2015, at 2:10 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 24-01-15 20:41, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Friday 2014-11-21 10:07, Alex Velenko wrote:
Can someone, please, approve?
we tried to document this in https://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html .
Can you perhaps
On Dec 1, 2014, at 2:52 AM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 11:00:12PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/27/2014 08:57 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
-/* { dg-error is not a constant expression { target c++ } 12 } */
+/* { dg-error { xfail { *-*-* } } 11 } */
On Jan 23, 2015, at 3:03 AM, Tejas Belagod tejas.bela...@arm.com wrote:
This is an almost obvious patch to fix PR64231 as discovered by A. Pinksi and
as proposed by Jakub.
Kinda crappy code. The macro to use here should take the number of bits as an
int, and wether the constant is signed or
On Jan 22, 2015, at 6:07 PM, Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com wrote:
The ARM run-time ABI says that long long division by zero should return the
result
This isn't a regression (AFAICT, this has never worked properly), so I don't
know if it's appropriate to consider this for trunk at
On Jan 21, 2015, at 1:54 AM, Chen Gang S gang.c...@sunrus.com.cn wrote:
On 1/6/15 04:07, Jeff Law wrote:
* toplev.c (init_local_tick): Process the failure when read
fails for random_seed.
This is fine for the trunk. Please install.
I am not familiar with the related working flow,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
But I am somewhat tired of editing hundreds of files for today. Why
did I write so many tests, stupid!?
:-) We appreciate all your efforts and all your tests.
On Jan 21, 2015, at 3:17 AM, Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Jakub Mike,
test.c:3:6: internal compiler error: in expand_TSAN_FUNC_EXIT, at
internal-fn.c:243
void step (int i)
It looks like your patches shot each other down..
Ah, I’d use the phrase one-step forward.
On Jan 20, 2015, at 6:29 AM, Renlin Li renlin...@arm.com wrote:
This patch will add unwrapped target selector for g++.dg/tls tests.
This patch will skip those testes as the intended exit code is not correctly
captured by dejagnu.
Okay to commit?
Ok.
Would be nice if someone can engineer
On Jan 19, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov maxim.kuvyr...@linaro.org wrote:
Yes, the ordering relation is screwed, as you put it. With the number of
independent heuristics that rank_for_schedule has to consider there is no
other way then to have a screwed ordering.
I have not seen a
On Jan 19, 2015, at 12:47 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
Long story short. Tsan has a logical data race the core of data race
detection algorithm. The race is not a bug, but a deliberate design
decision that makes tsan considerably faster.
Could you please quantify that for us?
On Jan 19, 2015, at 5:41 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov maxim.kuvyr...@linaro.org wrote:
In A B C A case all A, B and C are normal instructions. It is a
pre-existing condition. When compiling without debug information we have
ready list A, B, C. When compiling with debug information, we have ready
On Jan 19, 2015, at 12:43 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
I can't really make my mind on this. I would mildly prefer sleep's (if
they work reliably!).
Let me state it more forcefully. sleeps are not now, nor in the history of
computing ever been a synchronization primitive, except
On Jan 19, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov maxim.kuvyr...@linaro.org wrote:
On Jan 19, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 19, 2015, at 5:41 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov maxim.kuvyr...@linaro.org
wrote:
In A B C A case all A, B and C are normal instructions
On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod tejas.bela...@arm.com wrote:
As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please
can I reverse Andrew's patch
out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?
Ok.
Unless someone objects to a reversion like
On Jan 15, 2015, at 7:28 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
The attached patch fixes it by ensuring that LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS is computed
after set_ld_library_path_env_vars is invoked (this procedure invokes in turn
set_gcc_exec_prefix_env_var), both in c-torture.exp and in
On Jan 15, 2015, at 8:14 AM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that gcc-dg.exp calls check_effective_target_lto, which calls
libatomic_target_compile. Therefore gcc-dg.exp should be loaded only after
the
definition of libatomic_target_compile.
However, a similar exp file
So, I wanted to add some unrolling test cases and found that we had unroll-1.c
and unroll_[1-5].c. :-( - is the standard, and picking numbers sequential
from 1, with a - before the number is standard. No reason to deviate in this
case. I’ve fixed this by renaming the test cases like so:
Similar to the unroll_1.c change.
* gcc.dg/inline_1.c: Rename gcc.dg/inline_[1-4].c to inline-3[6-9].c.
* gcc.dg/inline_2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/inline_3.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/inline_4.c: Likewise.
701 - 800 of 3045 matches
Mail list logo
