On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 11:24 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
John Regehr reg...@cs.utah.edu writes:
I would only be worried for cases where no warning is issued *and*
unitialized accesses are eliminated.
Yeah, it would be excellent if GCC maintained the invariant that for
all uses of
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 11:54 +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
Can you give some indication of how the subset is enforced?
I find it weird that you choose to ignore the obvious: code reviews,
maintainer management, etc. Just like what you (gcc developers) do in
gcc's C codebase everyday. Unless, of
comments below,
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 14:05 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I've put a project proposal for split stacks on the wiki at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SplitStacks . The idea is to permit the stack
of a single thread to be split into discontiguous segments, thus
permitting many more
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 08:54 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
It would be totally awesome to do this if you could provide an option to
delegate to a user-provided function the allocation and deallocation of
the stack blobs needed by threads.
Yes, this would be a goal.
The main reason I
hi,
I am trying to write an inter-procedural SSA-based pass: all the
existing (in trunk) IPA passes seem to be running on a non-ssa
representation and I have been unable to figure out how to hack passes.c
to make it schedule an inter-procedural pass right after ssa
construction or after the end
hi,
I am looking into implementing a new instrumentation pass in gcc
called a globalizer and I would be really grateful for feedback
on whether or not such a pass could be considered for inclusion
(from a purely technical perspective).
1) Rationale
I work on network simulation
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 16:52 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
I think this would be a great feature to have, even if it did only work with
simple globals and couldn't handle TLS.
Disclaimer: I haven't thought it through thoroughly yet :) Nor am I sure
whether the better solution might not be to
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 17:34 +0200, mathieu lacage wrote:
Another solution would be to do something like this:
extern void *magic_function (void *variable_uid);
static int a;
void foo (void)
{
void *ptr = magic_function (a);
int *pa = (int *)ptr;
*pa = 1;
}
I think
; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
Copyright (C) 2004,2005 Mathieu Lacage
Author: Mathieu Lacage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*/
#ifndef DWARF2_ABBREV_H
#define DWARF2_ABBREV_H
#include stdint.h
#include stdbool.h
struct reader
hi mark,
On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 21:33 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'm not saying that having two different formats is necessarily a bad
thing (we've already got Tree and RTL, so we're really talking about two
levels or three), or that switching to LLVM is a bad idea, but I don't
think there's
hi,
Daniel Berlin wrote:
I discovered this when deep hacking into the symbol code of GDB a while
ago. Apparently, some people enjoy breakpointing symbols by using the
fully mangled name, which appears (nowadays) mainly in the minsym table.
This sort of hack is often used to work around
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 21:30 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 07:19:45PM +0100, mathieu lacage wrote:
While the debugging output looks quite correct at -O0, the -O2 output
seems broken:
main:
0: 8d 4c 24 04 lea0x4(%esp),%ecx
4: 83 e4
hi,
Since the cvs version of gas supports extensions for the dwarf2
basic_block location information, I thought I could try to add support
to gcc for this feature. My use of this feature is related to binary
code analysis: being able to gather the bb boundaries through gcc's
debugging output
13 matches
Mail list logo
