C++ PATCH for c++49823 (ICE on decltype scope in templates)

2011-07-24 Thread Jason Merrill
Clearly my test was inadequate...we need to handle DECLTYPE_TYPE as well as actual enums and classes. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 9c1e6f92b1b4bd4d30f4d04818900e05c59382bc Author: Jason Merrill Date: Sat Jul 23 14:21:48 2011 -0400 PR c++/49823 * parser.c (c

[google] Backport r175063, r175082 and r175384 from trunk to google/gcc-4_6 branch.

2011-07-24 Thread Easwaran Raman
Commited.

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] CFG aware dwarf2 cfi generation

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
On 07/24/2011 06:22 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: > This patch set causes a bootstrap failure on AIX: > > In file included from /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:1590:0: > /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/unwind.inc: In function > '_Unwind_RaiseException': > /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/u

Fix debug/49831

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
The ARM failure was due to constant pools being considered unreachable code. Ideally, we'd do something to mark these constant pools as data, not code, but again that's something for another day. A full arm-eabi test run is still underway, but at least the libgcc build failure is fixed. r~

Re: Fix debug/49825

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
With the last two fixes, the only remaining i686 regression from Thursday is 1 fortran testcase, whose number I have misplaced. This highlights an accidental change I made while moving code around between functions, and an assertion I added trying to see if we'd Done The Right Thing already. Th

Fix debug/49827

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
This fixes the examples given in the PR building libgcc for Sparc and CRIS. A full bootstrap on sparc64-linux is underway, but it'll take some time to complete. In the meantime it's well past the stage1 failure. Just a silly oversight in processing sequences, after having copied the code from pr

Re: PING^2 Re: PATCH: fix collect2 handling of --demangle and --no-demangle

2011-07-24 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 07/24/2011 08:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: 2011-06-17 Sandra Loosemore gcc/ * configure.ac (demangler_in_ld): Default to yes. * configure: Regenerated. * collect2.c (main

Re: Fix debug/49825

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
As a follow-up, by inspection, args_size should be zeroed across edges for which we explicitly undo args_size, like EH. But we do the same thing for non-local gotos and computed gotos. I couldn't see any difference in the test results with this patch, and frankly I'm surprised about that. But,

Fix debug/49825

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Henderson
Tested on i686-linux. I'm not sure how I missed this with {,-m32} testing on x86_64. r~ PR debug/49825 * dwarf2cfi.c (cfi_row_equal_p): Don't compare args_size. diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2cfi.c b/gcc/dwarf2cfi.c index 3ff4c61..f715e07 100644 --- a/gcc/dwarf2cfi.c +++ b/gcc/dwarf2

Re: PING^2 Re: PATCH: fix collect2 handling of --demangle and --no-demangle

2011-07-24 Thread H.J. Lu
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: >> Ping? >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01368.html >> >>> We had a bug report from a customer that the linker was ignoring the >>> --demangle and --no-demangle options

Re: PING^2 Re: PATCH: fix collect2 handling of --demangle and --no-demangle

2011-07-24 Thread H.J. Lu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > Ping? > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01368.html > >> We had a bug report from a customer that the linker was ignoring the >> --demangle and --no-demangle options when generating map files. >> Moreover, it was failing in

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Rewrite LEA handling (was:Re: PATCH [10/n] X32: Support x32 LEA insns)

2011-07-24 Thread H.J. Lu
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 3:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > This patch adds x32 LEA insn support.  The main issue is gen_lowpart (Pmode, operands[1]); doesn't work on symbol.  This patch avoids it. Also we shouldn't ge

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] CFG aware dwarf2 cfi generation

2011-07-24 Thread David Edelsohn
This patch set causes a bootstrap failure on AIX: In file included from /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:1590:0: /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/unwind.inc: In function '_Unwind_RaiseException': /farm/dje/src/src/libgcc/../gcc/unwind.inc:136:1: internal compiler error: in maybe_record_

[PATCH] Fix PR 49671 volatile goes missing after inlining

2011-07-24 Thread Andrew Pinski
Hi, There are two issues, first the inliner does not copy a volatile when creating a new tree in one case. The second issue is that IPA-SRA does not check if we are deferencing a pointer variable via a volatile type. OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu with no regressions. Thanks,

Re: Split insn-attr.h

2011-07-24 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > (In checking for such files - > there aren't that many - I also noticed that the target macro > DELAY_SLOTS_FOR_EPILOGUE is used and documented but not defined by any > target, so the code relating to that macro is ripe for removal and > poisoning of th

[PATCH, i386]: Rewrite LEA handling (was:Re: PATCH [10/n] X32: Support x32 LEA insns)

2011-07-24 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 3:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> This patch adds x32 LEA insn support.  The main issue is >>> >>> gen_lowpart (Pmode, operands[1]); >>> >>> doesn't work on symbol.  This patch avoids it. >>> >>> Also we shouldn't generate 32bit store with x32 PIC source. >>> >>> Any comments?

Re: [MMIX] Hookize PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P

2011-07-24 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Anatoly Sokolov wrote: > Hi. > > This patch removes obsolete PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and > PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P macros from MMIX back end in the GCC and > introduces equivalent TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND, TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and > TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_P

[M32C] Hookize PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P

2011-07-24 Thread Anatoly Sokolov
Hi. This patch removes obsolete PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P macros from M32C back end in the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND, TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P target hooks. Regression tested on m3

[MMIX] Hookize PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P

2011-07-24 Thread Anatoly Sokolov
Hi. This patch removes obsolete PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P macros from MMIX back end in the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND, TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P target hooks. Regression tested on mm

*ping* -- Re: [Patch, Fortran] Coarray: Add "token" to the descriptor, use it for argument passing

2011-07-24 Thread Tobias Burnus
* ping * http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-07/msg00246.html Tobias Burnus: Tobias Burnus wrote: This patch adds a "token" element as last element in the descriptor such that is can be easily ignored when passing a descriptor to a noncoarray descriptor dummy. Handling coarray descriptors di

Re: [PATCH 2/3] canonicalize_loop_ivs should not generate unsigned types.

2011-07-24 Thread Sebastian Pop
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 05:59, Richard Guenther wrote: > For two IVs with the same precision, one signed and one unsigned you choose > signedness of the canonical IV based on the random order of PHIs - that > doesn't > look correct. > > I think what you should do here is use an unsigned type if a

Re: hash policy patch

2011-07-24 Thread Paolo Carlini
... Francois, your patch, as applied had nasty typos, which probably broke the build (or we lacking tons of testcases ;) I committed the below. Paolo. PS: I think the fix could be suited also for the branch, maybe after a couple of weeks of testing... /// 2011-07-24 Paolo Ca

Re: hash policy patch

2011-07-24 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 07/24/2011 09:24 PM, François Dumont wrote: For info, I will submit a proposal for DR 41975 tomorrow or the day after. Oh, excellent, and good idea saying it in advance. Paolo.

Re: hash policy patch

2011-07-24 Thread François Dumont
On 07/24/2011 01:31 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: On 07/23/2011 10:31 PM, François Dumont wrote: Hi While working on DR 41975 I realized a small issue in current rehash implementation that sometimes lead to load_factor being greater than max_load_factor. Here is a patch to fix that: Ok, good.

[patch] Fix inlining glitch

2011-07-24 Thread Eric Botcazou
Hi, we sometimes get messages like this in Ada: prime-mc2-other.adb: In function 'PRIME.MC2.OTHER.DO_SOMETHING': prime-mc2.adb:2:4: warning: inlining failed in call to 'PRIME.MC2.GET_INPUT_VALUE.PART': non-call exception handling mismatch [-Winline] prime-mc2-other.adb:3:4: warning: called from

Re: [RFC] Replace some bitmaps with HARD_REG_SETs

2011-07-24 Thread Dimitrios Apostolou
Hi Steven, On Sun, 24 Jul 2011, Steven Bosscher wrote: Can you please create your patches with the -p option, so that it's easier to see what function you are changing? Also, even for an RFC patch a ChangeLog is more than just nice to have ;-) Do you mean an entry in Changelog file in root dir

Re: [RFC] Replace some bitmaps with HARD_REG_SETs

2011-07-24 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote: > Hello all, > > attached is my attempt to replace bitmaps, that we are *sure* they will > never map any pseudo regs, with HARD_REG_SETs. Jakub, I have moved the check > you suggested, for never surpassing FIRST_PSEUDO_REGS, into hard-reg

Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49771

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Ira Rosen wrote: > On 21 July 2011 15:19, Ira Rosen wrote: >> On 20 July 2011 21:35, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >>> >>> The return value of foo with vectorization is 1249 instead >>> of 1999 for some reason. >> >> I reproduced the failure. It occurs without Richard's

[Ada] Improve Out and In/Out parameter passing

2011-07-24 Thread Eric Botcazou
The Ada language has got Out and In/Out parameters for subprograms and gigi builds a special structure return type to pass them back. The attached patch improves the latter mechanism by promoting the mode of this structure return type if it is passed in registers. Tested on i586-suse-linux, ap

Re: vect-70.c fails on spu-elf

2011-07-24 Thread Ira Rosen
"Ulrich Weigand" wrote on 22/07/2011 05:05:57 PM: > Hi Ira, > > gcc.dg/vect/vect-70.c fails sporadically on spu-elf, because the local > variable "tmp1" exceeds local store size (it is over 1MB in size), and > thus the stack wraps around. > > Dorit had originally fixed this by reducing the size

[Ada] Do not mark array objects as addressable

2011-07-24 Thread Eric Botcazou
When gigi builds an indexed component reference with a variable index, it marks the array object as addressable. This was probably necessary back in the RTL days but this is very likely obsolete by now. Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2011-07-24 Eric Botcazou *

[Ada] Housekeeping work in gigi (31/n)

2011-07-24 Thread Eric Botcazou
Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2011-07-24 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/gigi.h (build_function_stub): Remove. (build_return_expr): Likewise. (convert_vms_descriptor): Declare. * gcc-interface/utils.c (convert_vms_descriptor): Make global.

Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49771

2011-07-24 Thread Ira Rosen
On 21 July 2011 15:19, Ira Rosen wrote: > On 20 July 2011 21:35, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> >> The return value of foo with vectorization is 1249 instead >> of 1999 for some reason. > > I reproduced the failure. It occurs without Richard's > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01022.html)

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Avoid use of lang_hooks.types.type_for_size.

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > 2011-07-23  Sebastian Pop   > >        * tree-data-ref.c (max_stmt_executions_tree): Do not call >        lang_hooks.types.type_for_size. > --- >  gcc/ChangeLog       |    5 + >  gcc/tree-data-ref.c |    5 - >  2 files changed, 9 inse

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix PR47653: do not handle loops using wrapping semantics in graphite

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > 2011-07-23  Sebastian Pop   > >        PR middle-end/47653 >        * graphite-scop-detection.c (graphite_can_represent_loop): Discard >        loops using wrapping semantics. > >        * gcc.dg/graphite/run-id-pr47653.c: New. >        * gcc

Re: [PATCH 2/3] canonicalize_loop_ivs should not generate unsigned types.

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > 2011-07-23  Sebastian Pop   > >        * tree-ssa-loop-manip.c (canonicalize_loop_ivs): Build an unsigned >        iv only when the largest type is unsigned.  Do not call >        lang_hooks.types.type_for_size. > >        * testsuite/libgomp

Re: PR 45819 - possible fix?

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 6:29 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: > >> Yeah, the testcase is invalid - that we lost the volatile was a bug, but >> you really have to fix the kernel. > > Sadly, that's not a helpful suggestion.  How else should the kernel > force a word-sized read?  I thought volatile was the way

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR48805: Do not instantiate ADDR_EXPRs

2011-07-24 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 09:35, Sebastian Pop wrote: >> With this patch we avoid instantiating ADDR_EXPR: it makes no sense >> to translate b[i] into b[{0, +, 1}_1]. >> > > This should have been &b[i] and &b[{0, +, 1}_1]. > > Ok for trunk? O

Re: [PATCH 5/9] [SMS] Support new loop pattern

2011-07-24 Thread Revital1 Eres
Hello Roman, > This patch should be applied only after pending patches by Revital. This patch > significantly enhances the existing implementation of the SMS. Patch adds > support of scheduling loops without doloop pattern. The loop should meet the > following requirements. Thanks for the patch

[PATCH 0/3] Second attempt at fixing PR47653

2011-07-24 Thread Sebastian Pop
Hi, The first patch of this set: Fix PR47653: do not handle loops using wrapping semantics in graphite follows the recommendation from Tobias: > As a first step to make Graphite correct, I would just bail out if > overflows can occur. Not handling induction variables of unsigned types has some

[PATCH 3/3] Avoid use of lang_hooks.types.type_for_size.

2011-07-24 Thread Sebastian Pop
2011-07-23 Sebastian Pop * tree-data-ref.c (max_stmt_executions_tree): Do not call lang_hooks.types.type_for_size. --- gcc/ChangeLog |5 + gcc/tree-data-ref.c |5 - 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLo

[PATCH 1/3] Fix PR47653: do not handle loops using wrapping semantics in graphite

2011-07-24 Thread Sebastian Pop
2011-07-23 Sebastian Pop PR middle-end/47653 * graphite-scop-detection.c (graphite_can_represent_loop): Discard loops using wrapping semantics. * gcc.dg/graphite/run-id-pr47653.c: New. * gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-3.c: Do not use unsigned types for

Re: [PATCH 3/9] [SMS] Eliminate redundant edges

2011-07-24 Thread Revital1 Eres
Hi Roman, > While building a data dependency graph for loop a ddg edge for some pair > of instructions with inter-loop dependency should be created only if > there is no edge for intra-loop dependency between these instructions. > Creating both of edges leads sometimes to the fact that function I

[PATCH 2/3] canonicalize_loop_ivs should not generate unsigned types.

2011-07-24 Thread Sebastian Pop
2011-07-23 Sebastian Pop * tree-ssa-loop-manip.c (canonicalize_loop_ivs): Build an unsigned iv only when the largest type is unsigned. Do not call lang_hooks.types.type_for_size. * testsuite/libgomp.graphite/force-parallel-1.c: Un-xfail. * testsuite/lib

tic6c-elf toolchain fails to build in FSF mainline

2011-07-24 Thread Nick Clifton
Hi Bernd, I tried building a tic6x-elf toolchain today from the FSF mainline sources, but "make all-gcc" fails with: make[1]: *** No rule to make target `/work/sources/gcc/current/gcc/common/config/c6x/c6x-common.c', needed by `c6x-common.o'. Stop. Could you fix this please ? Cheers