Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 51389

2012-01-27 Thread Andrey Belevantsev
On 25.01.2012 18:21, Richard Guenther wrote: 2012/1/25 Andrey Belevantsev: ... Sure, I've just had the impression that the datarefs vector is no use without the dependencies themselves. The possibility of making find_data_references_in_loop static also kind of hints in this direction. Anyways,

Re: Fix regression on PR46590 (slow compile with -O0)

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
> PR tree-optimization/46590 > * cfgexpand.c: Revert last change (r183305). > * gimplify.c (gimplify_bind_expr): Add clobbers for all non-gimple > regs. > * tree-eh.c (cleanup_empty_eh): Try to optimize clobbers before > checking for emptiness. I have installed

Re: [PATCH] FIx for PR51990 - ICE in copy_reference_ops_from_ref

2012-01-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 26/01/12 12:08, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: >> Richard, >> >> This patch fixes PR51990. >> >> The patch adds handling of WITH_SIZE_EXPR in copy_reference_ops_from_ref and >> create_component_ref_by_pieces_1, preventing ICEs on the test-cases.

[Ada] Small tweak to help GDB to display aliased dynamic array

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
This isn't a regression, but the patch doesn't change the generated code, just creates a VAR_DECL for debugging purposes. Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2012-01-27 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/decl.c (gnat_to_gnu_entity) : For an aliased object with an

Re: [PATCH] Don't add useless reverse_op vta equivalences (PR debug/52001)

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > When a VALUE contains already some constant location, it will be always > preferable to expressing it by some other expression - const (or some > similar reverse operation), so we just should point at adding the > reverse_op. > > Thi

[PATCH] 2 more testcase fixes for S/390

2012-01-27 Thread Andreas Krebbel
Hi, the attached patch fixes 2 more testcases for s390x. gcc.dg/dfp/fe-convert-2.c: This one is supposed to test libdecnumber functions. On s390 we have an instruction which does the conversion performed here what makes the testcase fail with -march=z9-ec or higher. Fixed

[Ada] Small tweak to help GDB to display labels

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
In the same basket as the previous one. Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2012-01-27 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/gigi.h (create_label_decl): Adjust. * gcc-interface/utils.c (create_label_decl): Add GNAT_NODE parameter and invoke gnat_pushdecl on it

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 51389

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
2012/1/27 Andrey Belevantsev : > On 25.01.2012 18:21, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> 2012/1/25 Andrey Belevantsev: > > ... > >>> Sure, I've just had the impression that the datarefs vector is no use >>> without the dependencies themselves.  The possibility of making >>> find_data_references_in_loop

Re: [PATCH] FIx for PR51990 - ICE in copy_reference_ops_from_ref

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 26/01/12 12:08, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Tom de Vries >> wrote: >>> Richard, >>> >>> This patch fixes PR51990. >>> >>> The patch adds handling of WITH_SIZE_EXPR in copy_reference_ops_from_ref and >>> cr

[Ada] Fix crash on complicated mix of limited with and generics

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
This isn't a regression either, but the fix shouldn't change the generated code. It's a crash on code involving a complicated mix of limited with and generics. As usual with limited with, we have an underlying circularity and we should break it on the pointer whose designated type is a limite

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 51389

2012-01-27 Thread Andrey Belevantsev
On 27.01.2012 13:19, Richard Guenther wrote: 2012/1/27 Andrey Belevantsev: On 25.01.2012 18:21, Richard Guenther wrote: 2012/1/25 Andrey Belevantsev: ... Sure, I've just had the impression that the datarefs vector is no use without the dependencies themselves. The possibility of making fi

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > Of course get_inner_reference looks through these kind of > > > conversions when returning the ultimate decl in MEM [&foo], > > > see the jumps in tree-ssa-alias.c we perform to re-discover > > > the

[Ada] Fix bug in layout of aliased components

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
This one has probably been there since day #1: the layout of aliased components of record types with default discriminants and variant part can be incorrect in some cases. The aliased components must be placed before the variant part, otherwise you risk having a dangling pointer. But it is a l

[Ada] Fix internal error on initialization of object with variant part

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
This is a regression present on the mainline. The compiler aborts when trying to generate code to initialize an object with a variant part whose size cannot be computed statically. Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2012-01-27 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/trans.c

Re: [Ada] improve layout of RETURN type made for CICO mechanism

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
> 2011-04-08 Eric Botcazou > > * gcc-interface/decl.c (gnat_to_gnu_entity) : Set minimum > alignment on fields of the RETURN type built for the Copy-In Copy-Out > mechanism. This can be counter-productive, as the RETURN type is bigger and might not fit in registers anymore.

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR51870 - [OOP] ICE with ALLOCATE and SOURCE-expr function returning BT_CLASS

2012-01-27 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Dear All, After discussion off line with Tobias and a bit of tweaking, the patch was committed as revision 183613. 2012-01-27 Paul Thomas Tobias Burnus PR fortran/48705 PR fortran/51870 PR fortran/51943 PR fortran/51946 * trans-array.c (gfc

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
> So I am testing the following - please tell me whether you are working > on a different fix. I was, but I realized that this would somewhat conflict with your latest patch to expand_assignment, where all MEM_REFs will go through get_inner_reference instead of the regular expander. Can't we av

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > So I am testing the following - please tell me whether you are working > > on a different fix. > > I was, but I realized that this would somewhat conflict with your latest > patch > to expand_assignment, where all MEM_REFs will go through get_inner_

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to weekly.2012-01-20

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Ian Lance Taylor writes: > I have committed a patch to libgo to update to the weekly.2012-01-20 > release. As usual this e-mail message only includes changes to files > specific to gccgo. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on > x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. This patch (or th

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR51953 - allow multiple alloc obj. with SOURCE= in allocate

2012-01-27 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Dear Tobias, This is 'obvious', barring the issue that I mentioned about multiple evaluation of expressions that are not variabbles. That said, I think that this could and should be committed now. OK for trunk. Cheers Paul On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote: > That's a Fo

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR51970/51977 MOVE_ALLOC fixes

2012-01-27 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
OK for trunk. Thanks for the patch Paul On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote: > This patch fixes expressions involving polymorphic arrays and, thus, > MOVE_ALLOC. > > I have also two minor fixes (cf. trans-decl.c). > > Build and regtested on x86-64-linux. > OK for the trunk? > >

Re: [Patch, Fortran] Fix elemental diagnostic for polymorphic dummies

2012-01-27 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
This is 'obvious' - OK for trunk. Thanks Paul On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Dominique found out that there is no diagnostic for polymorphic arrays. This > patch adds it. > > From the F2008 standard: > > "C1289 All dummy arguments of an elemental procedure shall be sc

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > So I am testing the following - please tell me whether you are working > > > on a different fix. > > > > I was, but I realized that this would somewhat conflict with your latest > > patch > > to ex

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to weekly.2012-01-20

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Rainer Orth writes: > I'm also checking IRIX 6.5 right now. IRIX does need one additional change indeed. Without it, I get /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/libgo/go/net/sockoptip.go:79:74: error: reference to undefined identifier 'syscall.IPV6_UNICAST_HOPS' /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/libgo/go/net

[C++ PATCH] Destroy/clear local_specializations properly in tsubst_pack_expansion (PR c++/51852)

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! My understanding is that we want to clear local_specializations even when saved_local_specializations is NULL, if the current function created the local_specializations htab (otherwise it isn't local, but global). The problem with that is that it isn't GTY marked and contains TREE_LIST nodes n

[PATCH] Fix PR51528

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
This fixes PR51528 by hiding the issue that SRA generates copy in/out with a type not suitable for preserving the data (any non-mode-precision thing). It fixes it by instead of emitting x$i_8 = x.i; D.1720 = x; D.1720.i = x$i_8; for an assign to an unscalarized D.1720 from a partly scalar

[PATCH] Do not "transform" clobbers in SRA

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
Quite obvious (just generates dead code) and quite annoys reading SRA dumps. Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. Richard. 2012-01-27 Richard Guenther * tree-sra.c (sra_modify_assign): Do not transform clobbers. Index: gcc/tree-sra.c ==

Re: [Patch, Fortran] Fix elemental diagnostic for polymorphic dummies

2012-01-27 Thread Tobias Burnus
On 01/27/2012 01:24 PM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: This is 'obvious' - OK for trunk. Thanks for the review. I realized that the following chunk was not in the submitted patch. I have no idea why it got lost, but after committal of the original patch and update of by devel tree it showed up

[PATCH] Fix ipa-pure-const wrt clobbers

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
Just noticed the following - oddly no testsuite regressions because of this ... Richard. 2012-01-27 Richard Guenther * ipa-pure-const.c (check_stmt): Clobbers do not make a function non-const/pure. Index: gcc/ipa-pure-const.c =

Re: empty directories in go/libgo

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Matthias Klose writes: > two more empty directories: > > find gcc-4.7-4.7-20120127/gcc-20120127 -depth -type d -empty -printf > rmdir %P\n -exec rmdir {} ; > rmdir libgo/go/exp/template > rmdir gcc/testsuite/go.test/test/bench/go1/_test Thanks. Removed from svn. Ian

Re: [PATCH] Do not "transform" clobbers in SRA

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > > Quite obvious (just generates dead code) and quite annoys reading > SRA dumps. > > Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. This regresses gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ipa-split-5.c, ipa-split is confused about clobbers on paths where th

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > > > So I am testing the following - please tell me whether you are working > > > > on a different fix. > > > > > > I was, but I realized that this

PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Aldy Hernandez
The LTO/TM tests are failing with a type mismatch on x86-32 because of the missing regparm on the prototype. I have added the regparm, and abstracted things a bit so we don't have to keep multiple copies. It's bad enough that we have to reproduce this once... OK? testsuite/ PR tests

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Rainer Orth writes: > Just as for the GCC 4.6 release, I plan to update the Solaris baselines > before 4.7.0 ships. The following untested patch (simply created with > make new-abi-baseline) would do so, but I don't propose installing it > yet for several reasons: > > * I'd like the baselines to

Re: PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Patrick Marlier
On 01/27/2012 10:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: +ITM_REGPARM noinline uint32_t _ITM_beginTransaction(uint32_t a, ...) { asm(""); } No ITM_REGPARM here. It should be also removed from libitm.h. -- Patrick.

Re: PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Aldy Hernandez
On 01/27/12 10:00, Patrick Marlier wrote: On 01/27/2012 10:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: +ITM_REGPARM noinline uint32_t _ITM_beginTransaction(uint32_t a, ...) { asm(""); } No ITM_REGPARM here. It should be also removed from libitm.h. -- Patrick. I'm ok either way. I'm just trying to get 32

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/23/2012 07:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: * I noticed several new symbols being placed into GLIBCXX_3.4.5, which also happens with gld and thus isn't an issue with Sun ld versioning support. Adding to an old version is not supposed to happen and must be fixed. +FUNC:_ZNSt19istreambuf_

[PATCH][ARM] Improve 64-bit shifts (non-NEON)

2012-01-27 Thread Andrew Stubbs
Hi all, This patch introduces a new, more efficient set of DImode shift sequences for values stored in core-registers (as opposed to VFP/NEON registers). The new sequences take advantage of knowledge of what the ARM instructions do with out-of-range shift amounts. The following are example

Re: PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Patrick Marlier
On 01/27/2012 11:02 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: If you all agree to remove ITM_REGPARM from libitm.h, then the tests on x86-32 will work. What is the status of this-- was there agreement on removing regparm? Note that I meant only for _ITM_beginTransaction. Indeed, regparm is ignored with varia

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Paolo Carlini writes: > On 01/23/2012 07:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> * I noticed several new symbols being placed into GLIBCXX_3.4.5, which >>also happens with gld and thus isn't an issue with Sun ld versioning >>support. Adding to an old version is not supposed to happen and must >>

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:18 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: Paolo Carlini writes: On 01/23/2012 07:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: * I noticed several new symbols being placed into GLIBCXX_3.4.5, which also happens with gld and thus isn't an issue with Sun ld versioning support. Adding to an old version is

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Paolo Carlini writes: +FUNC:_ZNSt19istreambuf_iteratorIcSt11char_traitsIcEEppEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.5 +FUNC:_ZNSt19istreambuf_iteratorIwSt11char_traitsIwEEppEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.5 >>> I don't think this is a new issue, I see it in 4.6 branch and even in 4.5 >>> branch. At some point we had a proble

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:27 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: They would be exported @3.4.11 if they had been present before. On Solaris before 4.7, there were not. Rainer Ah, Ok, now I see, you are talking about *Solaris-specific* issues. Because Linux is fine (or that old small glitch with istreambuf_iterator

[PATCH, MicroBlaze] Fix test after pcmp instruction

2012-01-27 Thread Michael Eager
The branch test after a pattern compare instruction was backwards. 2012-01-27 Michael Eager * config/microblaze.c (microblaze_emit_compare): Correct test after pcmp instruction. Index: config/microblaze/microblaze.c

[Patch,AVR]: Better support CPSE (a bit)

2012-01-27 Thread Georg-Johann Lay
This patch aims at better support of CPSE instruction in cases where otherwise code like TST Rn ; *cmpqi BREQ .+2; branch RJMP .Lm would be produced. As branch is not a single instruction, it cannot be skipped. peephole seems to be the only feature that can do this op

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:22 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Perhaps you have a pointer? . I can search, but really the issue is very, very old and we already released *many* GCCs "affected". This one: 2005-06-23 Jakub Jelinek PR libstdc++/22109 * src/compatibility.cc (_GLIBCXX_SYMVER_COMPATIBILIT

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Paolo Carlini writes: > On 01/27/2012 05:27 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> They would be exported @3.4.11 if they had been present before. On >> Solaris before 4.7, there were not. Rainer > Ah, Ok, now I see, you are talking about *Solaris-specific* issues. Because Perhaps partially, but ... > Linu

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: ... even on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (CentOS 5.6), I see additions to 3.4.11 (at least beyond the current baselines). Sure there are additions at 3.4.11, regularly explicitly exported @3.4.11 in the linker script. Everything went as planned, I repeat. T

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: I'd even argue that abi_check should flag all additions to released versions as a hard error. Again, agreed. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure we do that already, I'm pretty sure Benjamin tightened abi_check in the light of that problem we had in 20

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Paolo Carlini writes: > On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> ... even on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (CentOS 5.6), I see additions to >> 3.4.11 (at least beyond the current baselines). > Sure there are additions at 3.4.11, regularly explicitly exported > @3.4.11 in the linker script. Ever

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Paolo Carlini writes: > On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> I'd even argue that abi_check should flag all additions to released >> versions as a hard error. > Again, agreed. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure we do that already, I'm > pretty sure Benjamin tightened abi_check in the li

[PATCH, rs6000] Fix PR16458, eliminate redudant compares

2012-01-27 Thread Peter Bergner
This patch fixes PR16458 by using the type expression attached to a reg rtx to detect its signedness and generating unsigned compares when appropriate. However, we continue to use signed compares for the special case of when we compare an unsigned reg against the constant 0. This is because signed

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, Rainer Orth wrote: > Paolo Carlini writes: > > > On 01/27/2012 05:27 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> They would be exported @3.4.11 if they had been present before. On > >> Solaris before 4.7, there were not. Rainer > > Ah, Ok, now I see, you are talking about *Solaris-spe

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 05:54:56PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: > Paolo Carlini writes: > > > On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> I'd even argue that abi_check should flag all additions to released > >> versions as a hard error. > > Again, agreed. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure we

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 01/27/2012 05:53 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: Paolo Carlini writes: On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: ... even on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (CentOS 5.6), I see additions to 3.4.11 (at least beyond the current baselines). Sure there are additions at 3.4.11, regularly explicitly exported

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 05:54:56PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Paolo Carlini writes: >> >> > On 01/27/2012 05:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> >> I'd even argue that abi_check should flag all additions to released >> >> versions as a hard error. >> > Again, agreed. As a mat

Fix genautomata option parsing

2012-01-27 Thread Bernd Schmidt
I noticed that genautomata does not accept any of the options it is trying to handle, since init_rtx_reader_args already errors out for all of them. This was probably broken by some gensupport reorganization way back. Fixed with this patch; I also removed the zero initializations for the flags whi

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Jakub Jelinek writes: >> I doubt that, otherwise the additions to versions already released >> should have been flagged as such on Solaris, but abi_check suggests they >> are benign. > > If you mean > TLS:8:_ZSt11__once_call@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11 >

[PING] New port resubmission for TILEPro and TILE-Gx

2012-01-27 Thread Walter Lee
Ping? It's been a month. Seeing more feedback or status update. Thanks, Walter Lee On 12/30/2011 7:30 PM, Walter Lee wrote: I'm resubmitting the gcc ports to TILE-Gx and TILEPro as replies to this email. The resubmission addresses the feedback made by Richard Henderson in: http://gcc.gnu.o

Re: [Patch,AVR]: Better support CPSE (a bit)

2012-01-27 Thread Denis Chertykov
2012/1/27 Georg-Johann Lay : > This patch aims at better support of CPSE instruction in cases where otherwise > code like > >     TST   Rn     ; *cmpqi >     BREQ  .+2    ; branch >     RJMP  .Lm > > would be produced.  As branch is not a single instruction, it cannot be > skipped. > > peephole se

Re: [C++ PATCH] Destroy/clear local_specializations properly in tsubst_pack_expansion (PR c++/51852)

2012-01-27 Thread Jason Merrill
OK. Jason

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:31:55PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: > * There's quite a number of additions to 3.4.11: Probably Solaris didn't have _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS support before and now does? config/abi/pre/*.ver isn't currently conditionalized in any way, so I don't see an easy way to move these

Re: [C++ PATCH] Destroy/clear local_specializations properly in tsubst_pack_expansion (PR c++/51852)

2012-01-27 Thread Jason Merrill
On 01/27/2012 08:01 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: In the PR there is also a patch to switch local_specializations into a pointer_map, I think that would be more efficient, but probably 4.8 material, right? Yes, that change is OK for 4.8. Jason

Re: [PATCH] libgcc: refer to pthread_create, not pthread_cancel

2012-01-27 Thread Roland McGrath
I see. There certainly should have been a comment in the code about why pthread_cancel was chosen. I still think it's a particularly poor choice. For glibc, I think pthread_getspecific or pthread_key_create are better choices. Those are much smaller functions that don't bring very much dead cod

Re: [v3] Update Solaris baselines for GCC 4.7

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:31:55PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >> * There's quite a number of additions to 3.4.11: > > Probably Solaris didn't have _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS support > before and now does? Right, it didn't on Solaris 8 and 9 in 4.6, but does now. It seems the t

Re: [Patch,testsuite]: Fix testcase that bangs long and int against void*

2012-01-27 Thread Georg-Johann Lay
Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 07:40:59PM +0100, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >> The ilp32 is the closes match: >> >> The source casts pointer to int, int to pointer, long to int, uses 32-bit >> initializers for int, assumes size_t is unsigned long any maybe others. > > No. The source

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to weekly.2011-12-22

2012-01-27 Thread Rainer Orth
Ian Lance Taylor writes: > Fixed with the appended patch, which also gathers up all the possibly > missing functions that I noticed. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on > x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, which proves little as the system I tested on > has all these functions anyhow. Committed to main

Re: [PATCH] Fix expansion of BLKmode MEM_REF with non-addressable non-BLKmode base decl (PR middle-end/51895)

2012-01-27 Thread Eric Botcazou
> I have applied this now and the SRA side of the fix for PR50444. > As far as I know x86 should be ok with alignment-related issues > and SRA now - is there still a bug on strict-alignment platforms > we know of (thus, with a testcase)? Not that I know of, but let me do some testing on the SPARC

[pph] Fix ICE with circular #includes (issue5588046)

2012-01-27 Thread Diego Novillo
When generating PPH images, circular #includes cannot be handled using the usual double-guard inclusion in the pre-processor. This happens because we generate PPH images in separate compilations. So, even with properly double-guarded headers, each header will include the other in its image: 1.h

Re: Fix genautomata option parsing

2012-01-27 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 01/27/2012 12:20 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: I noticed that genautomata does not accept any of the options it is trying to handle, since init_rtx_reader_args already errors out for all of them. This was probably broken by some gensupport reorganization way back. Fixed with this patch; I also rem

[lra] patch to fix some bugs in LRA for arm

2012-01-27 Thread Vladimir Makarov
The following patch fixes some bugs in caller-saves pseudo splitting found on ARM toolchain. But ARM bootstrap failure is not fixed yet. The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64. Committed as rev. 183639. 2012-01-27 Vladimir Makarov * lra-int.h (lra_risky_equiv_subst

Re: PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Henderson
On 01/28/2012 03:11 AM, Patrick Marlier wrote: > On 01/27/2012 11:02 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: >> If you all agree to remove ITM_REGPARM from libitm.h, then the tests on >> x86-32 will work. What is the status of this-- was there agreement on >> removing regparm? > > Note that I meant only for _I

Re: PR testsuite/52011: add regparm to LTO/TM tests

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Henderson
On 01/28/2012 02:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > testsuite/ > PR testsuite/52011 > * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem.h: New file. > * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-2_0.c: Include it. > * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-1_1.c: Same. > * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-4_1.c: Same. > * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-

Re: [PATCH] Fix g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-rom.C failure

2012-01-27 Thread Andreas Schwab
Ok, the option is only recognized when it is mentioned in the specs, and neither darwin nor aix configurations have %{G*} in their CC1_SPEC, same for osf or vms on alpha. Checked in the following as obvious. Andreas. 2012-01-27 Andreas Schwab * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-rom.C: Don't add

[pph] Add support for disabling PPH input (issue5593043)

2012-01-27 Thread Diego Novillo
This patch adds support for disabling PPH reads. It uses the new support to disable PPH reading when we disable PPH writing. This is to avoid confusion in the PPH registration code that will have some stale content after the output file has been removed. Lawrence suggests that we should just fa

[committed] Use ACQ_REL __atomic_fetch_add in atomicity.h (PR libstdc++/51798)

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! As reported by David, PowerPC* has been using (contrary to documentation) __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL semantics (i.e. lwsync insn before and isync after) __sync_fetch_and_add intrinsics, which is heavily used in libstdc++. As this worked before, and there is no need for the strong consistency among the _

Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR51879 - Missed tail merging with non-const/pure calls

2012-01-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 24/01/12 11:40, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: >> Richard, >> Jakub, >> >> the following patch fixes PR51879. >> >> Consider the following test-case: >> ... >> int bar (int); >> void baz (int); >> >> void >> foo (int y) >> { >> int a; >> if (y

[Patch, Fortran] PR 52022 Fix function passing for funcs returning allocatable

2012-01-27 Thread Tobias Burnus
Dear all, I have committed the attached patch as obvious (Rev. 183643) after building and regtesting. I intent to backport it to 4.5 and 4.6. Tobias 2012-01-27 Tobias Burnus PR fortran/52022 * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_procedure_call): Fix passing of functions, which return allocatables.

Re: adjust installation docs to discourage installing GMP, MPFR and MPC separately

2012-01-27 Thread Quentin Neill
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 20 January 2012 23:08, Quentin Neill  wrote: >> >> My 2c - I heartily recommend this patch. > > Thanks. I'm a bit surprised noone else has commented - I hoped this > would be a no-brainer, or at least get some constructive feedback for >

[wwwdocs] deprecation of access declarations

2012-01-27 Thread Fabien Chêne
Hi Gerald, 2012/1/13 Fabien Chêne : [...] >> Mind suggesting a snippet for our release notes at >> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html ? > > Yes, sure, thanks for suggestion. Unfortunately, my machine is > currently down, I'll get back to you when it is repaired. I get back to you for the sni

Go patch RFC: Don't mark Go executables as requiring writable stack

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
PR 47656 points out that Go programs are often marked as having an executable stack. This is incorrect. Go does use trampolines, but they are never built on the stack. They are built on the heap, using mprotect. This is necessary because Go closures may be returned from functions and as such mu

Re: Go patch RFC: Don't mark Go executables as requiring writable stack

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 01:04:41PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > This patch fixes the problem by introducing a new builtin function > __builtin_init_heap_trampoline. This is a middle-end change so it is > covered under my maintainership. I also believe it is quite safe. > However, given that w

Re: Go patch RFC: Don't mark Go executables as requiring writable stack

2012-01-27 Thread Richard Henderson
On 01/28/2012 08:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 01:04:41PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> This patch fixes the problem by introducing a new builtin function >> __builtin_init_heap_trampoline. This is a middle-end change so it is >> covered under my maintainership. I also

Re: Go patch RFC: Don't mark Go executables as requiring writable stack

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Richard Henderson writes: > On 01/28/2012 08:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 01:04:41PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>> This patch fixes the problem by introducing a new builtin function >>> __builtin_init_heap_trampoline. This is a middle-end change so it is >>> covere

Re: Go patch RFC: Don't mark Go executables as requiring writable stack

2012-01-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 02:08:54PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Richard Henderson writes: > >> Looks good to me, except I wonder whether the builtin needs to be user > >> accessible. If not, can't you throw some * or space into the name, so that > >> the builtin is really internal to gcc? > >

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to weekly.2012-01-20

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Rainer Orth writes: > This patch is what I'm using for Solaris. Thanks. Committed. Ian

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to weekly.2012-01-20

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Rainer Orth writes: > Fixed as follows (the comment explains why done this way). > > With that patch, I can at least link libgo.so and link a trivial Go > program. Full bootstrap with run over the weekend. Thanks. Committed. Ian

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/51641 - Lookup finds enclosing class member instead of template parameter

2012-01-27 Thread Dodji Seketeli
Jason Merrill writes: > Comparing by same_type_p means that we treat any template parameter of > the appropriate level and index as equivalent. But that should be OK, > since we only have one set of level N template parameters in scope. > So I think we should be able to just compare the level of

Another merge from trunk to gccgo branch

2012-01-27 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
I've merged trunk revision 183655 to the gccgo branch. Ian

[committed] invoke.texi: fix hyphenation of "floating point" and related terms

2012-01-27 Thread Sandra Loosemore
This patch addresses a similar issue to the "command line" (noun) vs "command-line" (adjective) cleanups I dealt with in my previous patch. In English, compound adjectives are normally hyphenated when they appear as part of the noun phrase in a sentence as an aid to parsing. The "command line