Status
==
It's time for the GCC 9.4 release, I therefore plan to do a GCC 9.4
release candidate on May 19th and the release about a week after
that if no unforseen problems arise.
We have one P1 regression, PR98032 which is a C++ frontend issue.
Please make sure to backport regression fixes
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:40 AM JojoR via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a little know about for 'Sizes and offsets as runtime
> invariants’,
>
> and need to add vector types like V2SImode as compile-time constants
> with enabled vector types of runtime invariants.
>
>
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:18 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption th
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that it
> was only used with Google GCC branch, but it is actually used with GCC
> trunk as well.
>
> Given that, the tool will be restored in the github repo. It
On April 15, 2021 6:02:50 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Merrill wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:08 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> wrote:
>> On April 14, 2021 12:19:16 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
>> >N.B. Jeff is no longer @redhat.com so I've changed the CC
>
On April 14, 2021 12:19:16 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
>N.B. Jeff is no longer @redhat.com so I've changed the CC
>
>On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 11:03, Thomas Koenig
>wrote:
>> - All gfortran developers move to the new branch. This will not
>>happen, I can guarantee you that.
>
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 11:24 PM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> On 4/12/21 5:32 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> >
> > Please concentrate on the important things, we're supposed to get a
> > release of GCC 11 out of the door.
>
> Then it is important thi
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 7:22 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, 16:56 David Brown, wrote:
>
> >
> > The big problem with a fork, rather than an amiable split (where FSF/GNU
> > accepts that gcc wants to be a separate project) is the name. If the
> > FSF keep their own "gcc
Status
==
GCC trunk which is to become GCC 11 is in regression and documentation
fixes only mode. We're nearing the date planned for branching and
releasing GCC 11 but as usual the goal is to have zero release blockers
(aka P1 priority regressions) before doing so.
Please help in addressin
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:03 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On April 8, 2021 1:17:53 AM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn
> wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc
>
The GNU Compiler Collection version 10.3 has been released.
GCC 10.3 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 10 branch
containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in
GCC 10.2 with more than 178 bugs fixed since the previous release.
This release is available from the FTP servers listed
Status
==
GCC 10.3.0 tarballs have been generated and uploaded and the
GCC 10 branch is again open for regression and documentation fixes.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1
P2
On April 8, 2021 1:17:53 AM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
>wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc
> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
>
> On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:24 PM
> Simon Marchi via Gcc mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote:
> >
> > The default debug format (when using only -g) for the AVR target is
> > stabs. Is ther
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:21 PM Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >
> > Richard Biener pointed out dysfunction in the SC. The case of the
> > missing question I asked in 2019 also points to that. This response
&g
On April 4, 2021 10:26:37 PM GMT+02:00, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 14:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
>> ftp
On April 1, 2021 9:49:19 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 20:23, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>> Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> > On April 1, 2021 4:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
>> > wrote:
>> >>> I have s
On April 1, 2021 4:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
wrote:
>> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
>> x86_64-linux. Please test it and report any issues to bugzilla.
>
>It does not build for Windows:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/567582.html
On April 1, 2021 5:23:25 PM GMT+02:00, "Andrea G. Monaco"
wrote:
>
>I strongly disagree with the removal of Dr. Stallman from the Steering
>Committee.
>
>Not only RMS wrote the GCC initially, but I think he is the best person
>by far who can guarantee the values of free software, with unmatched
>
On April 1, 2021 3:52:37 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this would remove any problem that is present.
>>
>
>I have a problem understanding what you mean here because later on you
>state:
>
>> Now - the reason you think of is likely that IPA transform will
>instantiate
>> IPA
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> just a high level question. I know that IPA-PTA is a SIMPLE_IPA_PASS
> and that ideally it would be better as an IPA_PASS. I understand that
> one of the biggest challenges of changing IPA-PTA to an IPA_PASS is
> that on the cur
The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
892024d4af83b258801ff7484bf28f0cf1a1a999.
I have so far
Status
==
The GCC 10 branch is frozen for the release of GCC 10.3 with
a first release candidate published. All changes require
release manager approval.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
--- ---
P1
The GCC 10 branch is now frozen in preparation for the GCC 10.3 release
which will see a first release candidate built soon.
All changes from now on require release manager approval.
On March 31, 2021 5:23:09 PM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn
wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:46 AM Florian Weimer
>wrote:
>>
>> * David Edelsohn via Gcc:
>>
>> > Has the GCC SC blocked any new port or major feature? Not that I'm
>aware of.
>>
>> What about the plugin framework? The libgcc licensin
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 2:59 PM David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 8:28 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 1:36 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > >
> > > You are referencing the recent open letter which isn't
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 1:36 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> You are referencing the recent open letter which isn't really what
> people are discussing here. Although many probably sympathize with
> calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free Software
> Foundation and calling for Richard M
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 1:39 PM Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> > If the global is module local we should initialize it with NULL, yes. If
> > it is
> > not module local it should be initialized with NONLOCAL (that's both what
> > should currently happen correctly - it's needed for non-field-sensitive in
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:52 AM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am looking at the points-to analysis in GCC and I found the
> following comment in tree-ssa-structalias.c:
>
> /* Collect field information. */
> if (use_field_sensitive
> && var_can_have_subvars (decl)
> /*
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 9:03 PM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> [double sigh, attaching a pdf causes it to be blocked, and I guess the number
> of
> URLs is also triggering a spam trap for the follow up. I have removed many of
> the URLS from this, you'll have to use your google-fu for sources. I ema
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021, guojiufu wrote:
> On 2021-03-24 20:33, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Mar 2021, guojiufu wrote:
> >
> >> On 2021-03-24 15:55, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:55 AM guojiufu wrote:
> >> >>
> &
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021, guojiufu wrote:
> On 2021-03-24 15:55, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:55 AM guojiufu wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2021-03-23 16:25, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:33 AM guojiufu
> >&
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:55 AM guojiufu wrote:
>
> On 2021-03-23 16:25, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:33 AM guojiufu
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2021-03-22 16:31, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 a
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:33 AM guojiufu wrote:
>
> On 2021-03-22 16:31, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 09:22:26AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >> Better than doing loop versioning is to enhance SCEV (and thus also
> >> depen
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 7:41 AM guojiufu via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> As we know, type conversion is not in favor of optimization, and may
> cause performance issue.
>
> For example:
> for (unsigned int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
>a[m + i] = 1; //or a[30 + i] =
>
> In this code, the index to a
Status
==
The GCC 10 branch is open for regression and documentation fixes.
It's time to do the GCC 10.3 release and barring arrival of P1
priority regressions the plan is to do a release candidate in
two weeks, around Mar 31th with a release following a week later.
Please see to backport reg
:
>
> computed for foo:
>
> ```
> ANYTHING = { ANYTHING }
> ESCAPED = { NULL }
> NONLOCAL = { ESCAPED NONLOCAL }
> STOREDANYTHING = { }
> INTEGER = { ANYTHING }
> ISRA.4 = { NONLOCAL }
> derefaddrtmp(9) = { NULL }
> foo.constprop.0.isra.0 = { }
> ```
>
>
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 4:17 PM Erick Ochoa wrote:
>
> Hi Richard, I think I misunderstood yesterday's answer and deviated a
> little bit. But now I want to focus on this:
>
> > > * the process in GCC that generates the constraints for NULL works
> > > fine (i.e., feeding the constraints generated
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 11:34 AM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm still trying to compare the solution generated from the
> intraprocedural points-to analysis in GCC against an external solver.
>
> Yesterday it was pointed out that "NULL is not conservatively
> correctly represented i
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 12:25 AM Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Thanks, Michael, and again Richard for your quick responses.
>
> On 2021-03-16T15:25:10+, Michael Matz wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >
> >> >>Indeed, given (Fortran) 'zzz = 1', we produce GIMPLE:
>
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:25 PM Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> > >>Indeed, given (Fortran) 'zzz = 1', we produce GIMPLE:
> > >>
> > >>gimple_assign
> > >>
> > >>..., and calling 'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops' on that, I see, as
> > >>expect
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:02 PM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Richard, thanks for your answer. I'll need to look into this more; two
> questions already:
>
> On 2021-03-15T20:17:17+0100, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> > On March 15, 2021 7:31:46 PM GMT+01
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 1:16 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently working on improving my understanding of the implementation
> of the intraprocedural points-to analysis in GCC. I have already read the
> papers by Daniel Berlin and have been looking at the source for some tim
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is still in
regression and documentation fixes only mode (Stage 4).
If history should repeat itself then a first release candidate
of GCC 11 will be released mid April. For this to happen
we need to resolve the remaining 17 P1 regress
On March 15, 2021 7:31:46 PM GMT+01:00, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
>Hi!
>
>First time I'm using this API -- so the error certainly may be on my
>side. ;-)
>
>What I'm doing, is a 'walk_gimple_seq', and in that one's
>'callback_stmt', call 'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops', to collect
>variable load/st
es and maybe not set up
to deal with 64bit address registers at all.
> Thanks. Paul.
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 12:37 AM
> To: Paul Edwards ; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: negative indexes
>
>
ctually take effect, and go up into the 4 GiB to 8 GiB
>region.
And that's exactly what I said. Pmode is DImode but ptr_mode is SImode.
>
>Is your answer still applicable (I don't really understand
>your answer. :-) ).
>
>Thanks. Paul.
>
>
>
>
>-Orig
On March 14, 2021 6:55:32 AM GMT+01:00, Paul Edwards via Gcc
wrote:
>If I have code like this:
>
>char foo(char *p)
>{
>return (p[-1]);
>}
>
>It generates a negative index, like this:
>
>* Function foo code
> L 2,=F'-1'
> L 3,0(11)
> SLR 15,15
> IC
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 1:12 AM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> I'm having a "linker" error (according to Martin Liška) when
> compiling a SPEC test (x264_r) with a vendor branch under development (my
> optimization is done at LTO time.)
>
> The binutils on my development machine is the version
>
On February 13, 2021 12:20:48 AM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse
wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, Andrew MacLeod via Gcc wrote:
>
>> 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-t
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 4:26 AM Naoki Shibata via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a question as to the auto-vectorizer in GCC.
>
> When AVX512 instruction is available, the auto-vectorizer in gcc
> sometimes generates calls to AVX2 functions instead of AVX512 functions.
>
>
> $ cat vabitest.c
>
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:31 PM Alan Lehotsky wrote:
>
> I’m working on performance tuning a gcc 8.3 port and wanted to turn off SRA
> for an experiment. But passing both
>
> -fno-tree-sra
> -fno-ipa-sra
>
> but it’s still tagging compiled functions with a “_isra” suffix, which would
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 9:04 PM unlvsur unlvsur via Gcc wrote:
>
> That is not for inline. That is to allow implementing memcpy without
> introducing any libc runtime which allows us to use it in freestanding
> environment.
Note that GCC requires memcpy, memmove, memset and memcmp to exist even
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is now in
regression and documentation fixes only mode (Stage 4).
Please help triaging and fixing regressions to make a timely
release of GCC 11 possible.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from last report
-
On January 17, 2021 2:23:55 AM GMT+01:00, JiangNing OS via Gcc
wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Feng Xue OS
>> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 12:28 PM
>> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> Cc: JiangNing OS ; Hao Liu OS
>>
>> Subject: [RFC] A memory gathering optimization for loop
>>
>> 1. B
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is nearing the
end of Stage 3 which will happen on Jan 17th which is when
Stage 4 starts (aka regression and documentation fixes only).
We have accumulated quite a number of regressions, where
P1 classified regressions should be fixed
from expand_expr_real_*
so I don't
see a good way to handle this correctly. But maybe Joseph has an idea.
Richard.
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:50 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 12:24 AM Tucker Kern via Gcc wrote:
>> >
>> >
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 4:09 PM Martin Jambor wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> there have already been some inquiries from prospective students and so
> I would like to start preparing for the next year of Google Summer of
> Code now. I'll be happy to volunteer to be the main Org Admin for GCC
> again - so
On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 12:24 AM Tucker Kern via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm implementing named addresses spaces for a Harvard architecture machine
> to support copying data from instruction memory to data memory. This is
> achieved via a special instruction. e.g. think AVR and progmem/__flash.
>
>
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 9:16 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 1/8/21 12:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 10:41 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> The test case in PR 98465 brings to light a problem we've discussed
> >> before (e.g
On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 10:41 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The test case in PR 98465 brings to light a problem we've discussed
> before (e.g., PR 93971) where a standard container (std::string in
> this case but the problem applies to any class that owns and manages
> allocated memory) might trigger
On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 10:16 PM Gary Oblock via Gcc wrote:
>
> The offsets seem to actually be created. However,
> they are almost immediately are being deleted.
Use a watchpoint to see where.
> Any ideas what's going on? Has some kind
> of memory management gizmo gone awry?
>
> Gary
>
> PS For
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 8:19 PM Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> > >I think clang follows gcc and uses the type of the first operand.
> >
> > The desired behavior is the one that OpenCL specifies. If it is
>
On December 29, 2020 6:42:30 PM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse
wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote:
>
>> Any thoughts on what f should return in the following testcase, given
>the
>> usual GNU behaviour of treating signed >> as arithmetic shift right?
>>
>>typedef int vs4 __a
On December 23, 2020 2:29:48 PM GMT+01:00, "Martin Liška"
wrote:
>On 12/23/20 11:49 AM, FX via Gcc wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The gcc 10.2 release was 5 months ago today. A lot has happened in
>the gcc-10 branch since, in particular on aarch64. Could a new release
>be issued? It would make efforts
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:44 AM Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/12/11 15:47, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> Note that the add/sub sequence is different for (3) and (4) since
> >> -funsafe-math-optimizations is implicitly true. "fp-contract=fast" in
> >&
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 7:26 AM Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
> Thanks,
>
> On 2020/12/10 17:12, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> 2) From PR90070:
> >>
> >>double temp1 = (double)r->red;
> >>double temp2 = (double)aggregate.red;
> >>doub
t; > >
> > > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 16:15, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 5:47 PM Richard Biener
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
> Hi,
> I have observed that STV2 pass added ~20% on CPU2006 456.hmmer with mostly
> by transforming V4SI operations. Looking at the pass itself, it looks like
> it might be transformed into RTL architecture-independent, and the pass
> deals only not
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 9:47 AM Xionghu Luo via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a maybe silly question about whether there is any *standard*
> or *options* (like -ffast-math) for GCC that allow double to float
> demotion optimization? For example,
The only option we have to this effect would be -f
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 2:08 AM Jim Wilson wrote:
>
> I'm not aware of any other target that has a similar feature, so I thought
> a bit of discussion first might be useful.
>
> For most ISAs, there is one organization that owns it, and does development
> internally, in private. For RISC-V, the IS
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 13:01, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 17:18, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > &
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 17:18, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > &
On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 1:55 AM Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
>
> On 12/4/20 4:33 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > I'm looking for a way to get the FUNCTION_DECL for the library
> > (i.e., non-built-in) form of a function given the corresponding
> > built-in DECL. Is there an API I can all with either th
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:01 PM Alexander Yermolovich
wrote:
>
>
> --
> *From:* Richard Biener
> *Sent:* Friday, December 4, 2020 12:36 AM
> *To:* David Blaikie
> *Cc:* Alexander Yermolovich ; Jakub Jelinek <
> ja...@redhat.com>; M
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 16:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > >
> > &
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 6:52 PM David Blaikie wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:10 PM Alexander Yermolovich
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* David Blaikie
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 2, 2020 1:12 PM
>> *
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > For the test mentioned in PR, I was trying to see if we could do
> > >
_COND_EXPR into nop ?
Would everything match-up for a .VEC_CMP IFN producing a non-mask
vector type? ISEL could special case the a ? -1 : 0 case this way.
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imendörffer; HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 3:48 AM Liu Hao via Gcc wrote:
>
> 在 2020/11/27 上午7:50, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc 写道:
> > I've touched on the subject a few times, e.g.
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2019-December/230993.html
> > and https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2019-December/231013.html
> >
> >
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 8:15 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2020, Ilya Leoshkevich via Gcc wrote:
>
> > I have a C floating point comparison (a <= b && a >= b), which
> > test_for_singularity turns into (a <= b && a == b) and vectorizer turns
> > into ((a <= b) & (a == b)). So far so go
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 7:38 PM David Blaikie wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 3:11 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 12:04:45PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 08:50 +0100, Richard Biene
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 3:20 PM Adhemerval Zanella via Gcc
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 24/11/2020 10:59, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> > On 11/24/20 7:11 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >> ideally fpclassify (and other classification macros) would
> >> handle all representations.
> >>
> >> architecturally invalid
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 12:14 PM Marius Hillenbrand
wrote:
>
> On 11/23/20 12:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:53 AM Marius Hillenbrand via Gcc
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Digging into a test case failure
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 8:45 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 06:38:16PM -0800, David Blaikie via Gcc wrote:
> > > I would pick -gdwarf32/-gdwarf64 (are we sure the DWARF spec will
> > > never reach version 32 or 64?
> > > maybe -g32 / -g64 similar to -m32/-m64 are good enough?)
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:53 AM Marius Hillenbrand via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Digging into a test case failure with section anchors, I found
> dependence analysis return false negatives, leading to bad optimization
> by cse1. Two variables are synthetically constructed aliases. One is
> addressed
On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 1:21 AM m...@klomp.org wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 08:22:26PM +, Alexander Yermolovich wrote:
> > On llvm side of compiler world there has been work done by Igor Kudrin to
> > enable DWARF64.
> > I am trying to add a flag to Clang to enable DWARF64 generation.
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually will become GCC 11 is now in Stage 3
which means open for general bugfixing.
We have accumulated quite a number of regressions, a lot of the
untriaged and eventually stale. Please help in cleaning up.
Quality Data
Priority # C
L_FUNCTION_CODE (fndecl) : (built_in_function)BUILT_IN_LAST);
> @@ -523,6 +527,10 @@ maybe_warn_pass_by_reference (gimple *stmt, wlimits
> &wlims)
> (but not definitive) read access. */
> wlims.always_executed = false;
>
> + /* Ignore args we are not going to rea
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 11:53 AM Uecker, Martin
wrote:
>
>
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:31:42PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > I was looking at the recent linux patch series [1] where segment
> > > qualifiers (named address spaces) were introduced to handle percpu
> > > varia
rn_pass_by_reference (stmt, wlims);
> + if (gcall *call = dyn_cast (stmt))
> + maybe_warn_pass_by_reference (call, wlims);
> else if (gimple_assign_load_p (stmt)
> && gimple_has_location (stmt))
> {
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imend
local mode
> (false) or the IPA mode (true). */
>
> @@ -1174,6 +1531,10 @@ analyze_function (function *f, bool ipa)
> param_modref_max_accesses);
>summary_lto->writes_errno = false;
> }
> +
> + if (!ipa)
> +analyze_parms (summary);
> +
>int ecf_flags = flags_from_decl_or_type (current_function_decl);
>auto_vec recursive_calls;
>
> @@ -1191,8 +1552,9 @@ analyze_function (function *f, bool ipa)
> || ((!summary || !summary->useful_p (ecf_flags))
> && (!summary_lto || !summary_lto->useful_p (ecf_flags
> {
> - remove_summary (lto, nolto, ipa);
> - return;
> + collapse_loads (summary, summary_lto);
> + collapse_stores (summary, summary_lto);
> + break;
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -1957,7 +2319,7 @@ compute_parm_map (cgraph_edge *callee_edge,
> vec *parm_map)
> : callee_edge->caller);
>callee_pi = IPA_NODE_REF (callee);
>
> - (*parm_map).safe_grow_cleared (count);
> + (*parm_map).safe_grow_cleared (count, true);
>
>for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
> {
> diff --git a/gcc/ipa-modref.h b/gcc/ipa-modref.h
> index 31ceffa8d34..59872301cd6 100644
> --- a/gcc/ipa-modref.h
> +++ b/gcc/ipa-modref.h
> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ struct GTY(()) modref_summary
>/* Load and stores in function (transitively closed to all callees) */
>modref_records *loads;
>modref_records *stores;
> + auto_vec GTY((skip)) arg_flags;
>
>modref_summary ();
>~modref_summary ();
> diff --git a/gcc/params.opt b/gcc/params.opt
> index a33a371a395..70152bf59bb 100644
> --- a/gcc/params.opt
> +++ b/gcc/params.opt
> @@ -931,6 +931,10 @@ Maximum number of accesse stored in each modref
> reference.
> Common Joined UInteger Var(param_modref_max_tests) Init(64)
> Maximum number of tests performed by modref query.
>
> +-param=modref-max-depth=
> +Common Joined UInteger Var(param_modref_max_depth) Init(256)
> +Maximum depth of DFS walk used by modref escape analysis
> +
> -param=tm-max-aggregate-size=
> Common Joined UInteger Var(param_tm_max_aggregate_size) Init(9) Param
> Optimization
> Size in bytes after which thread-local aggregates should be instrumented
> with the logging functions instead of save/restore pairs.
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imend
s are not considered escape points
> > > + by tree-ssa-structalias. */
> > > + else if (gimple_code (use_stmt) == GIMPLE_COND)
> > > + ;
> > > + else
> > > + {
> > > + if (dump_file)
> > > + fprintf (dump_file, "%*s
+ for (tree parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (current_function_decl); parm;
> parm_index++,
> + parm = TREE_CHAIN (parm))
> +{
> + tree name = ssa_default_def (cfun, parm);
> + if (!name)
> + continue;
looks like the vec might be quite sparse ...
> + int
Current description
> "Nonzero if the argument does not escape."
> reads to me that it is about ptr itself, not about *ptr and also it does
> not speak of the escaping to return value etc.
Well, if 'ptr' escapes then obvoiously all memory reachable from 'ptr'
escapes - escaping is always transitive.
And as escaping is in the context of the caller sth escaping to the
caller itself (via return) can hardly be considered escaping (again
this was designed for PTA ...).
I guess it makes sense to be able to separate escaping from the rest.
Richard.
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imend
for each INSERT with this
mismatch)
Note that ::empty () also oddly uses too_empty_p (m_n_elements)
(maybe we should rename m_n_elements to m_n_elements_with_deleted)
Thanks,
Richard.
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imend
oints-to non-local, points-to NULL, points-to vars: { }
>
> Flow-insensitive points-to information
>
> -i3p.1_3, points-to NULL, points-to vars: { D.1947 D.1948 }
> +i3p.1_3, points-to non-local, points-to escaped, points-to NULL, points-to
> vars: { D.1947 }
> i4p.2_4, points-to NULL, points-to vars: { D.1948 }
>
> main ()
>
> Honza
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Felix Imend
On November 6, 2020 8:45:55 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc
wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 06:26:58PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2020, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>>
>> > It isn't that easy (because update_version_git checks the gcc trunk
>and
>> > so I had to insert a sh
re
> made and how some criticisms may fail to really address the reason why
> these designs were made.
>
> On 03/11/2020 15:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 6:44 PM Erick Ochoa
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello again,
> >>
> >> I&#x
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 1:16 PM Alexander Monakov via Gcc
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 12:38 PM Alexander Monakov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2020, Uros Bizjak via Gcc wrote:
> > >
> > > > > What is the usecase for stripping the addre
501 - 600 of 2565 matches
Mail list logo
