Re: A question on ACX_BUGURL

> It assumes there is no @ in $1. Shouldn't be > > REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="@uref{`echo $1 | sed 's/@/@@/g'`}" Seems fair, but please check all the users, they might be escaping the value already. Paolo

Re: Using SSA

> I think (if I'm correctly interpreting the list in passes.c) it is. It's > right after pass_warn_function_noreturn, just before pass_mudflap_2. Is > this right? I don't get any assertion about SSA not being available. In this case, it is also after pass_del_ssa, which means SSA has already be

Re: Using SSA

> The tree_opt_pass for my pass has PROP_ssa set in the properties_required > field. Is this all I need to do? You need to put your pass after pass_build_ssa. Setting PROP_ssa does not build SSA itself, but it will cause an assertion failure if the pass is run while SSA is (not yet) available.

Re: RFC: obsolete __builtin_apply?

Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 3/16/07, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Do you mean this patch: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg00841.html > > Yes, thanks for finding the patch. > > I will look over it this weekend and apply it if it is good. Build parts are ok, except t

Re: GCC 4.2 branch comparision failure building Java

Mark Mitchell wrote: > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> IIUC, the problem only manifests while *building* the release candidates, >> not for users of the release candidate. >> >> For 4.2, my suggestion is to just use a bootstrap4 while building the RC. > > That&#x

Re: GCC 4.2 branch comparision failure building Java

> This didn't apply with 4.1 because then, without toplevel bootstrap, all > files to be copied to the source directory were generated and copied in > stage 1, so stage 2 and stage 3 both built them from the source directory. > Now, stage 1 is not only built as C only but the whole stage 1 bui

Re: core changes for mep port

>>> Look at the calls to cgraph_mark_edge in ipa-inline.c >> There is no such function. I couldn't find anything in ipa-inline >> that (1) had access to both ends of the call edge, (2) was actually >> called, and (3) was called before the inlining happened. > > Sorry, I meant cgraph_mark_inline.

Re: Referenced Vars in IPA pass

> int x; > { > int y; > { > int z; > ... > } > ... > } > > just happens to have three statements, all VAR_DECL,x, y, z, without > any reference to the starting and ending blocks. As a side question, > how can I get hand of where the blocks st

Re: Mainline bug in RTL fwprop.

> It would be really sweet if we propagated the 'di - 4' into insn 8, then > recognized that di is now the value of SI 58, and propagated di into the > compare. insn 7 would be dead and we'd get the code the PR is looking > for :-) Unfortunately there's no hope of that because fwprop doesn't do

Re: Why use pentium4 for Pentium M?

Zuxy Meng wrote: Hi, -march=native choose pentium4 instead of pentium-m for Pentium M processors (see config/i386/driver-i386.c)? Is this intentional or a typo? I think the reason is that Intel changed completely the microarchitecture (going back to something that actually is more similar t

Re: A combiner type optimization is causing a failure

My question is that, IMO the test is checking overflow behaviour. Is it right to have such a test ? Would you care to prepare a patch that moved it under gcc.dg, adding a { dg-options "-O2 -fno-strict-overflow" } marker (or maybe "-O2 -fno-wrapv")? But your optimization should also be condi

Re: GCC 4.2.0 Status Report (2007-02-19)

I am agree, benchmarking is evil. My favorite benchmark is gcc because it is my tool and I work on it. Compilation of gcc from Spec2000 is >12% slower with df including last Paolo's patches (which are a really big improvement). Interesting enough, 176.gcc has a pretty bad result for runti

Re: GCC 4.2.0 Status Report (2007-02-19)

In term of ports, yes I am agree. As the preformance even with last Paolo's patches (some changes could be applied to the mainline too, so it is not only about df), the branch compiler is still 8.7% slower for SPECint2000 compilation on 2.66Ghz Core2 with --enable-check=release. Just to str

Re: Fw: Strange paths for gcc for x86_64-pc-mingw32

But then I noticed, that the pathes to the tool-chain - which is installed under /usr/local/x86_64-pc-mingw32 - is used while compile, is somehow broken for the gcc tool. I assume, that the gcc toolchain is to be found under /usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-mingw32/4.3.0, but it is search in /

Re: Makefile.def and fixincludes/Makefile.in inconsistency?

Am I correct in guessing that the "missing" lines in Makefile.def are not currently needed? Or are they merely present in the GCC fixincludes but missing in the fixincludes directories in some other trees that share the top-level build files? Yes, a patch that removes the "missing" lines fo

Re: Some thoughts and quetsions about the data flow infrastracture

Richard Kenner wrote: Yes, one possibility is to use a RTX hook for this too. By default you would return NULL (and this would propagate up); in combine you could override it to return the CLOBBER. I really don't see why. Look at when combine calls the simplify routines now. If they return z

Re: Some thoughts and quetsions about the data flow infrastracture

[trimming down the Cc list] 1) what to do with (clobber (const_int 0)). This should be not so much of a problem thanks to validate_change, but I'd be weary of having such CLOBBER rtx-en in REG_EQUAL notes! Just return NULL. The philosophy of simplify_rtx is different from combine. In the fo

Re: Some thoughts and quetsions about the data flow infrastracture

Well before GCC 4.x there was an attempt that a few of us worked on to try to move the algebraic simplifications from combine to simplify-rtx.c, just like we put tree folding in fold-const.c. At that point, combine just becomes "bookkeeping". The problem with that approach was what to do with

Re: Some thoughts and quetsions about the data flow infrastracture

The problem is that to use the modern approach you need another description of insns (with one pattern - one machine insn relation) in tree representation with given cost for the tree. And it is a huge work to rewrite current machine descriptions even only for this. This is not really necessa

Re: Some thoughts and quetsions about the data flow infrastracture

I even have own tool for this NONA http://cocom.sf.net . Although it might be a good research to make it work on insns from diffrent BBs. Of course instruction selection is usually done intra-BB. However, some analyses that combine performs, such as nonzero_bits and num_sign_bit_copies, ma

Re: Pre Compiled Headers

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. There can be only one PCH inclusion in every compilation. Paolo

Re: problem building gcc4-4.3.0-20070209

This seems horribly wrong somehow. Aren't we intested in the ${build} -> ${host} compiler at this point anyway? So shouldn't we be testing it? I think the whole block can go. Hmm, it says indeed "this is going to change when we autoconfiscate". Something like this? Index: configure.ac ==

Re: Division by zero

I'm going to use an asm (). Yeah, an asm volatile ("" : : "r" (x) : ) should please GCC and still be portable to different platforms. Paolo

Re: problem building gcc4-4.3.0-20070209

if test ${build} != ${host}; then some defaults else AC_PROG_CC fi AC_TRY_COMPILE ac_objext is set at the expansion of AC_PROG_CC and if you take the if branch, it never gets set. Does anyone reading this know what the right thing to do is? Is there anything in the autoconf documentation

Re: Scheduling an early complete loop unrolling pass?

As we also only vectorize innermost loops I believe doing a complete unrolling pass early will help in general (I pushed for this some time ago). Thoughts? It might also hurt, though, since we don't have a basic block vectorizer. IIUC the vectorizer is able to turn for (i = 0; i < 4; i+

Re: gcc-4.1.2 RC1 build problem

The macro $(SYSTEM_HEADER_DIR) is used in a double-quoted context, leading to nonportable "...`..."..."...`...", see . Proposed untested patch. (I also haven't checked whether there are other instances of this iss

Re: Failure to build libjava on 512MB machine

Still, this shows that we did have an increase in memory use recently, which may be worth looking into. (And, of course, I'm happily testing Tom's patch as we speak.) I'd be curious to know the effect of removing the "complexity" field of struct tree_exp. It should be possible to bootstrap

Re: Failure to build libjava on 512MB machine

Anyway, I tried again, this time with the right file, and it took 78.67user 1.29system 1:20.01elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k and indeed, it does want a lot of memory - at peak some 550m. It'll be smaller on a 32-bit box, but not much smaller. I want to get rid of TREE_COMP

Re: G++ OpenMP implementation uses TREE_COMPLEXITY?!?!

, C/C++ only, with no regression. Note that this is *not* the patch I sent yesterday, which did not work. Ok for mainline? Paolo 2007-01-30 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * cp/cp-tree.h (OMP_ATOMIC_CODE): Delete. (OMP_ATOMIC_DEPENDENT_P): Rewrite. * cp/pt.c (

Re: G++ OpenMP implementation uses TREE_COMPLEXITY?!?!

You know (or so I assume) this was a very Very VERY BAD thing to do are not helpful. Of course, if RTH had thought it was a bad thing, he wouldn't have done it. Well, I must agree that there is probably no justification other than the quote that Richard posted. :-P Still, I agree with you

Re: char should be signed by default

A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects. The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is compiled with the proper dialect. It is unlikely to work at all if compiled with the wrong dialect. It depends on the program, and whether or not chars in the

Re: raising minimum version of Flex

I'm not at all impressed with the recent series of flex releases, since it started using m4 internally and passing user code through m4. (cf. bison, which unlike flex pays proper attention to assuring that arbitrary valid parsers are not mangled by m4). Fully agreed. The recent releases o

Re: Preventing warnings

Andrew Pinski wrote: On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 01:49 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: It would be nice to have such a construct in GNU C, something that could be used in a macro expansion, and would turn off _all_ warnings for the code within the construct. http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Diagnost

Re: lib{gomp,decnumber}/autom4te.cache

FX Coudert wrote: Is there any reason why libgomp and libdecnumber don't have a svn:ignore property containing autom4te.cache? I noticed the following always showing up in my "svn status" after a maintainer-mode build: ? libdecnumber/autom4te.cache ? libgomp/autom4te.cache Go ahead

Re: Cheatsheet for building gcc

with the changes to the build system in the last few months, I am having problems to do some things I am used to do during development. I found more or less satisfactory procedures for most them, however, I would like to know the "official" way how to achieve those effects (and to put the creat

Re: Cheatsheet for building gcc

Richard Kenner wrote: Q2) How to bootstrap the compiler, but not build any time consuming libraries (libjava, libstdc++)? A2) "make stage{2,3,feedback}-bubble" Can you say what the differences between these three are? Which is the equivalent of the old "cd gcc; make bootstrap"? They wil

Re: Miscompilation of remainder expressions

cltq addl %edx, %eax xorl %eax, %edx But the register allocations constraints are pretty heavy considering that idivl already puts strain on the RA. Paolo, what does the cltq instruction do? I cannot find it in my x86 reference manuals... Uhm, I meant cltd and it is the same as "cdq" in th

Re: Cheatsheet for building gcc

if you configure with --enable-stage1-languages=all, 1) will all the libraries be built three times during bootstrap, or just once? Just once. Things that are built three times are only those that have "bootstrap=true" in the Makefile.def file. Paolo

Re: Miscompilation of remainder expressions

Compared to the slow idivl, abs could be negligible, right. However, abs does introduce new data dependence which might add a noticeable cost. Is there an abs instruction in the i386 instruction set? No, the closest thing (input in eax, output in edx) is cltq addl %edx, %eax xorl %eax, %e

Re: Cheatsheet for building gcc

Is there a way how to do it without reconfiguring gcc? No. Do you think it would be best to have --enable-stage1-languages=all in non-release branches? The time taken to compile the stage1 (nonoptimized) non-C front-ends is small, and the advantage seems significant. Q6) How to clean u

Re: Cheatsheet for building gcc

Q1) How to bootstrap the compiler, including all libraries? A1) "make" from the top directory Could some of the build system experts please provide the answers for the following questions? Q2) How to bootstrap the compiler, but not build any time consuming libraries (libjava, libstdc++)?

Re: Invariant division

drizzle drizzle wrote: Hi Does gcc do an divison by constant optimization for any 16 bit architecture. Can anyone point me to where it does that ? Yes, in expmed.c (expand_divmod). Paolo

Re: PATCH: Build shared libraries with -Bsymbolic-functions

libjava will use -Bsymbolic on Linux, which is more aggresive than -Bsymbol-functions. It will bind global data references locally in additon to global function references. My patch will keep -Bsymbolic for libjava if it is set by libjava/configure.host. Here is an updated patch. The configur

Re: PATCH: Build shared libraries with -Bsymbolic-functions

config/ 2007-01-10 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * ld-symbolic.m4: New. Please name the macro AC_LIB_PROG_LD_GNU_SYMBOLIC, or ACX_PROG_LD_GNU_SYMBOLIC. libgfortran/ 2007-01-10 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * aclocal.m4: Include ../config/lib-ld.m4 and ../config/

Re: Making gcc read from the standard input

Tathagato Rai Dastidar wrote: Hello, Is there a way I can make GCC read a C or C++ code from the standard input instead of from a file? In my application software, I am generating some C code on the fly, writing it to a file, then using GCC to compile it. Instead of that, I want to invoke G

Re: PATCH: Build shared libraries with -Bsymbolic-functions

H. J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 06:26:09AM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: "H.J." == H J Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: H.J.> With the new linker switches, -Bsymbolic-functions and H.J.> --dynamic-list-cpp-new, we can improve shared library H.J.> performance in gcc. This change will build libs

Re: RFC: Speeding up libstdc++.so with --dynamic-list-data

I am testing this patch now. It should fix the regresions when libstdc++ is built with -Bsymbolic-functions --dynamic-list-cpp-new What about just --dynamic-list-cpp that enables the new behavior and implies --dynamic-list-cpp-typeinfo (I know that it is useless in this particular case, sin

Re: C++ overflow testcases failing on mainline

It seems I managed to mess up the patch applied to revision 120558. The problem is that somehow all testcases have been added three times. I cannot imagine how such thing happenned. You probably used "patch" which, instead of warning if a patch creates a file that is already there, happily puts

Re: Do we want non-bootstrapping "make" back?

Richard Kenner wrote: Not much. I'm convinced it would be feasible, but definitely not easy, so I wanted to see how much interest there was - seems like some, but not a lot. Would this comprise retrofitting the support into the 4.2 branch? I don't think it's needed in the 4.2 branch since you

Re: Top level libgcc checked in

Andrew Pinski wrote: We should also be very careful not to introduce differences between native and cross compilers. So, we should have no run-time tests, no tests that look at /proc, headers in /usr/include, etc. Right--I was really only suggesting tests that can be done at compile-time. Perh

Re: configuration options policy (at toplevel or only inside gcc/)?

In particular, IMHO the commands to re-generate the configure scripts should be documented if the documentation also targets potential GCC contributors. I agree, that sounds useful. DJ, Alexandre, Paolo, what's your take on this. Any recommendations? Patches are always welcome. :-) Basil

Re: [heads-up] disabling "../configure --disable-bootstrap && make bootstrap"

The problem is that last step: it takes a LONG time to build libjava, for example. If I make a change that I need to give a sanity check to, I want to compile GCC with it, but not all the other additional code: that's for a later state in the development/testing cycle. Since building a stage o

[heads-up] disabling "../configure --disable-bootstrap && make bootstrap"

As per the subject. The upcoming merge of toplevel libgcc will only work either for disabled bootstrap, or with the toplevel bootstrap mechanism. For this reason, we are now disabling "../configure --disable-bootstrap && make bootstrap". The correct way to bootstrap is to just use "./configu

Re: does zlib really need to build multilib?

Jack Howarth wrote: I noticed that in gcc trunk and gcc 4.2 branch that multilib builds of zlib occur. Does gcc actually use the multlib zlib? Not for the host zlib. For instance on x86_64 linux does the 32-bit zlib get used or on Darwin does the 64-bit zlib get used? We are considering us

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

Or you can do, since elsewhere in the code you compute time_t_max: for (j = 1; j <= time_t_max / 2 + 1; j *= 2) No, this does not work. It would work to have: for (j = 1;;) { if (j > time_t_max / 2) break; j *= 2; } Oops. Paolo

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

int j; for (j = 1; 0 < j; j *= 2) if (! bigtime_test (j)) return 1; Here it is obvious to a programmer that the comparison is intended to do overflow checking, even though the test controls the loop. Well, it's not to me. :-) Another question for the GCC expert

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

Maybe he forgot the delicate details? The issue may happen if this example was incomplete (my "completion" may need some tweaking to make it more realistic): #define make_a_bar(ppInstance) *(unsigned**)(&ppInstance)=make_a_uint(sizeof(struct bar)) make_a_bar(foo->bar); foo->bar

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

foo->bar = make_a_bar(); foo->bar->none = value; being rendered as: call make_a_bar foo->bar->none = value foo->bar = You are not describing a C compiler. Um, I'm describing what gcc did? I think he meant x = make_a_bar (); x->none = value; foo->bar = x; I don't know if this is a vali

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

Some time ago (a year?) I was told on this mailing-list that code breakage due to undefinedness of signed overflow is not too common (I at least claimed with no evidence that it was more than one bug per 1,000 lines). My claim was counterclaimed by something like "most of the time people work

Re: -fwrapv enables some optimizations

On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 03:50:23PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: Indeed. Fixing this may require it to be possible to mark individual operations with their overflow semantics (which will also be needed for LTO to handling inlining between translation units compiled with different options).

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

We've optimized expressions such as (a*2)/2 on the basis of overflow being undefined for a very long time, not just loops. What is (a*2)/2 optimized to? certainly it has the value a if you wrap, so you are not necessarily depending on undefined here. No, it has not. For example, if a is 0x

Re: Paolo Bonzini appointed build system maintainer

Mark Mitchell wrote: Paolo -- The GCC SC has appointed you as a co-maintainer of the build machinery. Please add an appropriate MAINTAINERS entry. Congratulations, and thank you for accepting this position! Thanks very much, I committed the following. 2006-12-19 Paolo Bonzini <[EM

Re: GCC optimizes integer overflow: bug or feature?

By the way, as I've tried to describe here: variable range tracking can result in reintroduction of supposedly-fixed security vulnerabilities. 8-( Interesting read. I agree with the proposed fix; however, note that GCC does not

Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS

The counter quote is obviously wrong, thanks for the report. Why it is important to not have CFLAGS influence the build product? The standard, is for it to so influence the build product. Why is it important for gcc to not follow the standard? Because when I happened to change well-establi

Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Makefile.html http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html I read that, could you please quote the part that documents the current behavior. If you wish to use non-default GCC flags when compiling the stage2 and stage3 compilers, set BOOT_CFLAGS on the command

Re: configuration options policy (at toplevel or only inside gcc/)?

Note that configure options beginning with --with and --enable are passed from the top level configure script to the subdirectory configure scripts. So the user just uses all the options at the top level, and the subdirectories will see them. I did notice this, but it seems to me (maybe I am

Re: g++ doesn't unroll a loop it should unroll

loop anyway... you C++ people tend to overtax compiler with optimizations. Is it really necessary to do (i == j) * factor when (i == j) ? factor : 0 is easier for compiler to grok? Of course I tried it. It's even slower. Doesn't help the compiler unroll the loop, and now there's a branch at e

Re: Announce: MPFR 2.2.1 is released

That idea got nixed, but I think it's time to revisit it. Paolo has worked out the kinks in the configury and we should apply his patch and import the gmp/mpfr sources, IMHO. Note that these two issues (my patch, which by the way was started and tested by Nick Clifton, and whether to import

Re: CEA (France) has signed assignment of copyright to FSF on GCC

Paolo Bonzini wrote: The legislation in the US, however, is probably very different: for example, the copyright assignment form would have a separate signature, or a click-through if done via web, where you accept that the FSF keeps the data on a computer in order to process the assignment

Re: CEA (France) has signed assignment of copyright to FSF on GCC

Personally, I think the list should be somewhere that *all* gcc maintainers have access to (not all of us have gnu.org accounts). I agree that in principle, GCC "code maintainers" would need to check it after approving a patch of somebody who has no CVS access. But the FSF does not care about

Re: block reordering at GIMPLE level?

Looking at the backend optimizations, it is clear that some modify the CFG. But my understanding is that loop optimizations and unrolling are also being moved to GIMPLE. I do not know about others. Loop optimizations are performed on GIMPLE only because they are really hard to perform on RTL

libffi compilation failure on Solaris 10?

This bug, documented in the installation instructions: "GCC 3.3 triggers a bug in version 5.0 Alpha 03/27/98 of the Sun assembler, which causes a bootstrap failure when linking the 64-bit shared version of libgcc. A typical error message is: ld: fatal: relocation error: R_SPARC_32: file

Re: strict aliasing benefit examples

I guess I can imagine that macro expansion might result in some cases where strict-aliasing is of benefit. Most people fail to use a temporary in a macro, probably because __typeof__ is gcc-only. I can probably fit 20 lines of code on a readable slide. Ideas? In C++, this: f (vector &vec) {

Re: strict aliasing benefit examples

for(i = 0;i<*t;i++) *f += 1.0; This one is pretty realistic, especially if you consider C++ and inlining: struct s { int size; float *data; }; void f(struct s *d, struct s *s) { int i; for (i = 0; i < s->size; i++)

Re: strict aliasing benefit examples

int f(int *a, float *b) { *a = 1; *b = 2.0; return *a == 2; } Problem: people don't write code that way. (well I hope not) People declare a few local variables, load them with data via the pointers, do stuff with the local variables, then save back the results via the pointers. So that

Re: Objects in c++ and objc

Come Lonfils wrote: Hi, I need precise information about how GCC store the objects for c++ and objective-C For C++, the source of information is the C++ ABI. See http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/ For Objective-C, I don't know and I suspect the answer is that the information is only in

Re: machine-dependent Passes on GIMPLE/SSA Tree's?

Note that in general we're trying to avoid introducing target dependent stuff into the gimple/SSA optimizers. We should consider the vectorization code as the exception rather than the rule for this kind of thing. Well, these exceptions are starting to pile up however. Besides ivopts, which

Re: how to load a cfg from a file by tree-ssa

Rob Quill wrote: On 24/11/06, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rob Quill wrote: > I haven't looked into this yet, but as I think I may need to be able > to do something similar, is it possible to parse the cfg file that is > given out, and build a C structure like t

Re: how to load a cfg from a file by tree-ssa

Rob Quill wrote: I haven't looked into this yet, but as I think I may need to be able to do something similar, is it possible to parse the cfg file that is given out, and build a C structure like that? It seems to me that the answer had been already given in the message you fully quoted: we ca

Re: make clean no longer works properly?

Now I get: make[1]: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. make: *** [clean-stage4-gcc] Error 2 It turns out I had a fix already approved, but never checked in. Fixed (and my apologies). Paolo

Re: bootstrap on powerpc fails

Maybe in another six years cpu improvements will outpace gcc bootstrap times enough to reconsider. We'll have 60 cores per CPU, and 1 minute after invoking "make" we'll be cursing how much it takes for insn-attrtab.c to finish compiling. :-) Paolo

Re: Volatile operations and PRE

At a wild guess, maybe strip_useless_type_conversions() is doing something Bad. Almost there. It looks like strip_useless_type_conversions is not used, and then something Bad happens. The following patch fixes it, but it's completely untested. 2006-11-07 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL P

Re: Problem with listing i686-apple-darwin as a Primary Platform

Jack Howarth wrote: I would more worried about the second issue if gcc 4.2 was remotely close to release. However at the rate regressions are being fixed (or not) in gcc 4.2 branch, I wouldn't hold my breath as to which is released first (gcc 4.2 or Leopard). Once Leopard is released, Darwin8

Re: compiling very large functions.

While I agree with you, I think that there are so many things we are already trying to address, that this one can wait. I think we've been doing a very good job on large functions too, and I believe that authors of very large functions are just getting not only what they deserve, but actuall

Re: compiling very large functions.

Kenneth Zadeck wrote: I think that it is time that we in the GCC community took some time to address the problem of compiling very large functions in a somewhat systematic manner. While I agree with you, I think that there are so many things we are already trying to address, that this one can

Re: Even stricter implicit conversions between vectors

Assuming I understand the proposal properly, this sounds to me like it amounts reversing the change we experienced in the Apple GCC from 3.3 -> 4.0. Type checking became a lot more lax for us in 4.0. This was a bug and has been fixed recently. I cannot recall if the fix has been backporte

Re: Even stricter implicit conversions between vectors

Ian Ollmann wrote: Assuming I understand the proposal properly, this sounds to me like it amounts reversing the change we experienced in the Apple GCC from 3.3 -> 4.0. Type checking became a lot more lax for us in 4.0. This was a bug and has been fixed recently. I cannot recall if the fix

Re: Handling of extern inline in c99 mode

According to the proposal, we will restore the GNU handling for "extern inline" even when using -std=c99, which will fix the problem when using glibc. I am probably overlooking something, but if the only problematic system is glibc, maybe this can be fixed with a fixincludes hack? Paolo

Re: [PING] fwprop in 4.3 stage 1?

I believe the appropriate next step is to freshen these patches against mainline, and re-bootstrap and regression test them. Sure, I just wanted to make sure that it was worth the cycles. I'll do so as soon as possible. Thanks, Paolo

Re: build failure, GMP not available

I wouldn't object to that. It's a bit more build-system complexity, but if it makes it easier for people, then it's worth it. Actually, since we are at it, I would like to have toplevel configure automatically symlink "foo-1.2.3" to "foo". This way, untarring gmp/mpfr (and maybe also bison

Re: build failure, GMP not available

There is also "fink" (fink.sf.net), which i believe would provide a new enough gmp, but i am not positive. Yes, fink packages "gmp gmp-shlibs libmpfr1-dev libmpfr1-shlibs" provide all that is needed. Paolo

[PING] fwprop in 4.3 stage 1?

Given that Roger started the ball rolling, by approving Steven's -fcse-skip-blocks patch, I'll ping the discussion... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01066.html Paolo

Re: GMP test

Andrew Pinski wrote: On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 13:32 +0900, Paolo Bonzini wrote: I'm more content with the gmp check at the top level and don't plan to submit a change to that. Although I agree if this configure is shared between binutils, gdb and gcc, and you're not compili

Re: GMP test

I'm more content with the gmp check at the top level and don't plan to submit a change to that. Although I agree if this configure is shared between binutils, gdb and gcc, and you're not compiling gcc, then it shouldn't require gmp. So maybe something like your "test -d" fragment would be appr

Re: GMP test

But this is a different case as this error is for users rather than developers. So instead of getting an error early before compiling, we get an error 10 to 20 minutes later and users get upset that they get an error this late for something which could have been found early on. That is a probl

Re: GMP test

if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then ... fi but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack for the sake of disabling Fortran). Moving it is not really a good thing anyways as you are able to configure an

GMP test

It seems that the GMP test is always run, even when installing binutils or gdb. You probably need something like if test -d ${srcdir}/gcc && test x$have_gmp != xyes; then ... fi but I think that the whole test now belongs in the GCC subdirectory, not in the toplevel (it was anyway a hack f

Re: Abt SIMD Emulation

For targets which doesn't have simd hardware support like fr30 , simd stuff is emulated? Is there some flags/macros in gcc to indicate that? To indicate what? I guess to indicate that the vector is emulated. The TYPE_MODE of the vector type, in that case, is BLKmode or an integer mode.

Re: Implicit conversions between vectors

This lack of type safety is unsettling, and I wonder if it should be fixed with a patch along the lines of the (not yet fully tested) one below. Does that sound reasonable? It seems right to try to fix the generic code here, even though the testcase in hand is target-specific. If this approac

Re: building gcc

In particular, I was just wondering how do compile GCC with debug. Not how to debug it. I tried CFLAGS="-g" ./configure ..., but it still compiled with gcc -O2 -g. Anyways, if anyone knows a helpful configure trick that will help get me ready to debug gcc, please let me know. By default, GCC b

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >