Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: >> 2012-08-23 Uros Bizjak >> >> * target.def (reject_combined_insn): New target hook. >> * doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN): New hook. >> * doc/tm.texi: Regenerated. > > The preferred location for hook docume

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > For the hook in question, it would be the same effort as far as > the hook is concerned: Ir really makes no difference if you > > - Pass X to the hook and return true or false > > - Pass X to the hook and return X or NULL_RTX. > > Howev

[PATCH, testsuite] No short enum in tree-ssa test

Ssa-dom-thread-3.c has following code to trigger a warning on ARM. Add -fno-short-enums to suppress it. struct tree_base { enum tree_code code:16; }; OK to trunk and 4.7? 2012-08-15 Joey Ye * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-dom-thread-3.c: Add -fno-short-enums. Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-

Re: [PATCH] Changes in mode switching

Vladimir Yakovlev wrote: > I discoverd some inaccuracies when tried to implement vzeroupper > insertion (pr#47440). > > First, I made 'transp' as an array of bit vectors rather bitvector > because it should be own for each mode, otherwise its resetting on > mode changing kills all modes (and new

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 18747

Hi again, On 08/23/2012 05:53 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: On 08/23/2012 05:24 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 08/23/2012 10:04 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: +if (decl +&& TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL +&& ! TYPE_P (CP_DECL_CONTEXT (decl))) + { +error_at (decl_spec_token_start->location

Re: [google/4_7] New fix to avoid LCP stalling andw with 0xff

Ok for now but some follow up may be needed. thanks, David On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: >>> This patch is for google branches only. >>> >>> This is t

Re: [google/gcc-4_7-mobile] Backport patch from google/gcc-4_7

OK for branches/google/gcc-4_7-mobile. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Han Shen(沈涵) wrote: > Hi Ahmad, I'd like you to do a code review, which backports the > following patch (r190600) from google/gcc-4_7. > > 2012-08-22 Han Shen > > Fixed the problem that LINUX_GRTE_EXTRA_SPECS overr

Re: [google/4_7] New fix to avoid LCP stalling andw with 0xff

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: >> This patch is for google branches only. >> >> This is the patch I plan to apply after reverting an earlier set of >> patches ported over from trunk that addressed the same problem

[google/gcc-4_7-mobile] Backport patch from google/gcc-4_7

Hi Ahmad, I'd like you to do a code review, which backports the following patch (r190600) from google/gcc-4_7. 2012-08-22 Han Shen Fixed the problem that LINUX_GRTE_EXTRA_SPECS overrides SUBTARGET_EXTRA_SPECS by prepending LINUX_GRTE_EXTRA_SPECS to SUBTARGET_EXTRA_SPECS

Re: [google/4_7] New fix to avoid LCP stalling andw with 0xff

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote: > This patch is for google branches only. > > This is the patch I plan to apply after reverting an earlier set of > patches ported over from trunk that addressed the same problem but > were causing some performance regressions. This is a narro

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR54350 - fix freeing of gfc_ss scalarizer variables

On 23/08/2012 22:13, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Tobias Burnus wrote: >> I am now down to a single kind of failure: pointer_remapping_*.f08 >> fails. One has code like: >> ptr(1:5, 1:2) => arr >> >> The question is how to solve that one. If one removes the AR_FULL and >> sets lse.descriptor_only, t

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 22:46 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > > However, I always get surprised when combine would actually take the > > split and continue trying combinations with the insns that came out from > > the split, and when it won't. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. > > Very

[PATCH] Fix bug in scheduler's handling of DEBUG_INSNs

This patch fixes an ICE in sched-deps.c due to a dereference of an empty list. The problem is in handling of DEBUG_INSNs and its peculiarity of disregarding requests to free dependence lists in certain cases. This patch fixes up an instance of disregarding such a request going wrong. Along the

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

Mike Stump writes: > On Aug 23, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c: In function ‘target_globals* >>> save_target_globals()’: >>> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c:69:33: error: ‘ggc_alloc_target_globals’ was >>> not declared in this scope >>> make: *** [ta

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:29:39PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Aug 23, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c: In function ‘target_globals* > >> save_target_globals()’: > >> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c:69:33: error: ‘ggc_alloc_target_globals’ > >> was

Re: [google/gcc-4_7-mobile] Merge google/gcc-4_7 to google/gcc-4_7-mobile

OK for branches/google/gcc-4_7-mobile. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Han Shen(沈涵) wrote: > Hi Ahmad, this patch is to merge google/gcc-4_7 up to revision 190426 > onto google/gcc-4_7-mobile. > > Patch attached. > > -- > Han Shen

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

On Aug 23, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c: In function ‘target_globals* >> save_target_globals()’: >> ../../gcc/gcc/target-globals.c:69:33: error: ‘ggc_alloc_target_globals’ was >> not declared in this scope >> make: *** [target-globals.o] Error 1 >>

Re: [google] Handle incompatible cg options more generally in LIPO (issue6476057)

The patch is needed to handle more options that will causes invalid LIPO module grouping. The new option handled is -fsized-delete. David On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:32 AM, David Li wrote: > Index: coverage.c > === > --- coverage.c

RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk

We have maintained the gupc (GNU Unified Parallel C) branch for a couple of years now, and would like to merge these changes into the GCC trunk. The purpose of this note is to ask for suggestions on the best way to proceed through the GUPC review and merge process. For reference, The GUPC projec

[google/4_7] New fix to avoid LCP stalling andw with 0xff

This patch is for google branches only. This is the patch I plan to apply after reverting an earlier set of patches ported over from trunk that addressed the same problem but were causing some performance regressions. This is a narrower fix I had originally prepared before finding the trunk patche

Re: Merge C++ conversion into trunk (0/6 - Overview)

On Aug 12, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > Other than the bootstrap change, the patches make no functional > changes to the compiler. Everything should build as it does now > in trunk. In my gcc/Makefile, I see: CFLAGS = -g CXXFLAGS = -g -O2 This makes builds in the gcc directory defau

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

Oleg Endo schrieb: Hello, On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 19:52 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: Uros Bizjak wrote: Hello! This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook is called from recog_for_combine, so it is th

Re: [PATCH, MIPS] fix MIPS16 jump table overflow

Sandra Loosemore writes: > On 08/21/2012 02:23 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> >> Would be nice to add a compile test for -mabi=64 just to make sure >> that Pmode == DImode works. A copy of an existing test like >> code-readable-1.c would be fine. > > I'm having problems with this part -- it seem

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Mike Stump writes: >> On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> GCC has a fair number of global variables that cache target-dependent >>> data. This makes it difficult to switch between subtargets on the fly, >>> such a

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

Mike Stump writes: > On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> GCC has a fair number of global variables that cache target-dependent >> data. This makes it difficult to switch between subtargets on the fly, >> such as when switching between a MIPS16 and a non-MIPS16 function. >>

[Patch, Fortran] PR54350 - fix freeing of gfc_ss scalarizer variables (was: Request for help with the scalarizer)

Tobias Burnus wrote: I am now down to a single kind of failure: pointer_remapping_*.f08 fails. One has code like: ptr(1:5, 1:2) => arr The question is how to solve that one. If one removes the AR_FULL and sets lse.descriptor_only, the test cases fail; nevetheless, I wonder whether someth

[lra] patch to fix full bootstrap for LRA

The following patch fixes a failure during x86 bootstrap with Java language. The first bug occurs when we have BB containing only debug insns. LRA before the patch did not update live info correctly during processing EBBs containing such BBs. The second bug was in assigning wrong mode for

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

In gcc/gcov-io.c, the call to open() only has two arguments. This is fine, as long as the system open() is standards compliant. So you have to add another fixincludes hack, adding a macro indirection like the one you have for ioctl: #define open(a, b, ...) __open(a, b , ##__VA_ARGS__, 0660)

Re: [PATCH] fix wrong-code bug for -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

On 08/23/2012 03:08 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: In fact, you should probably implement code-generation constraints from within the frontends by, for strict volatile bitfields, emitting loads/stores using DECL_BIT_FIELD_REPRESENTATIVE (doing read-modify-write explicitely). Or maybe you can elabo

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, Uros Bizjak wrote: > 2012-08-23 Uros Bizjak > > * target.def (reject_combined_insn): New target hook. > * doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN): New hook. > * doc/tm.texi: Regenerated. The preferred location for hook documentation is in the doc st

Re: RFC: Putting target-dependent global state into switchable structures

On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > GCC has a fair number of global variables that cache target-dependent > data. This makes it difficult to switch between subtargets on the fly, > such as when switching between a MIPS16 and a non-MIPS16 function. > > Our current approach is

Re: patch for machine independent rtl section to hide case statements for different types of constants.

All changes made as Richard requested. Retested on x86-64. committed as revision 190627 2012-08-23 Kenneth Zadeck * alias.c (rtx_equal_for_memref_p): Convert constant cases. * combine.c (find_single_use_1, mark_used_regs_combine): Convert to CASE_CONST_ANY. * cse.c (exp_equi

Minor C++ PATCH to compute_array_index_type

There was a comment here wondering why we were using dependent_type_p instead of type_dependent_expression_p; this patch makes the change. I also tweaked the definitions of cp_walk_tree to use more helpful names for the macro arguments. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 67

[google] Handle incompatible cg options more generally in LIPO (issue6476057)

Index: coverage.c === --- coverage.c (revision 190369) +++ coverage.c (working copy) @@ -261,6 +261,56 @@ str_eq (const void *p1, const void *p2) return !strcmp (s1, s2); } +/* Command line option descriptor. */ + +struct opt_

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

Hello, On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 19:52 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Uros Bizjak wrote: > > Hello! > > > > This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so > > targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook > > is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >> This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so >> targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook >> is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the target that has the >> final say on the combine

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so >>> targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook >>> is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the target that has the >>> final say on the combin

[PATCH v3, i386]: Fix PR46829 and PR46843, ICE in spill_failure with -fschedule-insns on x86

Hello! Attached patch implements TARGET_COMBINE_REJECT_INSN target hook [1] for x86. The patched gcc rejects combined instructions with hard registers that don't fit operand constraints, and this way helps reload to avoid spill failures. Please note that critical instructions include instructions

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Uros Bizjak wrote: >> Hello! >> >> This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so >> targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook >> is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the target that h

Re: [PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so > targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook > is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the target that has the > final say on the combined insn. Hi, great place for a

Re: [Patch,AVR] PR54222: Add fixed point support

Weddington, Eric wrote: > >> Georg-Johann Lay: >> >> Hi, here is an updated patch. >> >> Some functions are reworked and there is some code clean up. >> >> The test results look good, there are no additional regressions. >> >> The new test cases in gcc.dg/fixed-point pass except some convert-*

[PATCH, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

Hello! This patch introduces TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook, so targets are able to reject combinations of two or more insns. The hook is called from recog_for_combine, so it is the target that has the final say on the combined insn. This target hook will be used in a follow-up x86 patch

RE: [Patch,AVR] PR54222: Add fixed point support

> -Original Message- > From: Georg-Johann Lay > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:49 AM > To: Denis Chertykov > Cc: Weddington, Eric; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [Patch,AVR] PR54222: Add fixed point support > > Hi, here is an updated patch. > > Some functions are reworked an

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Implement atomic_fetch_sub

On 08/03/2012 02:52 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: I'll take a look at it next week unless someone gets to it first. Andrew OK, so maybe I sort of forgot about implementing the generic transformation until now. This patch bootstraps and passes all the testsuite cases. Factored out a little co

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 18747

On 08/23/2012 05:24 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 08/23/2012 10:04 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: +if (decl +&& TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL +&& ! TYPE_P (CP_DECL_CONTEXT (decl))) + { +error_at (decl_spec_token_start->location, + "%qT is not a template type", TREE_TYPE (dec

[PATCH] Changes in mode switching

I discoverd some inaccuracies when tried to implement vzeroupper insertion (pr#47440). First, I made 'transp' as an array of bit vectors rather bitvector because it should be own for each mode, otherwise its resetting on mode changing kills all modes (and new mode also). Another changes concern

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 18747

On 08/23/2012 10:04 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: +if (decl + && TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL + && ! TYPE_P (CP_DECL_CONTEXT (decl))) + { + error_at (decl_spec_token_start->location, + "%qT is not a template type", TREE_TYPE (decl)); + decl = error_mark

Re: [Patch,libgcc]: Apply filter-out to fixed-bit.c

Georg-Johann Lay writes: > * Makefile.in (fixed-funcs,fixed-conv-funcs): filter-out > LIB2FUNCS_EXCLUDE before adding them to libgcc-objects, > libgcc-s-objects. > * fixed-obj.mk: Only expand dependency if $o is not in > LIB2FUNCS_EXCLUDE. This is OK. Thanks. Ian

Re: [PATCH] arm.md: Use the revsh and rev16 instructions for BSWAP:HI RTL in armv6 and up

On 19.04.2012 09:05, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On 16 April 2012 20:35, Louis Kruger wrote: This patch teaches the arm target about the rev16 and revsh instructions which can efficiently execute the recently added __builtin_bswap16() function (BSWAP:HI in RTL) These instructions are available

Re: [patch] rs6000: plug a leak

On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 00:53 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello Bill, > > This patch plugs a leak in rs6000.c:rs6000_density_test(). You have to > free the array that get_loop_body returns. Noticed while going over > all uses of get_loop_body (it's a common mistake to leak the return > array). >

Ping^3 Re: Add --no-sysroot-suffix driver option

Ping^3. This patch is still pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: -fdump-ada-spec: misc small fixes

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, Arnaud Charlet wrote: > * c-ada-spec.c (dump_generic_ada_node): Fix handling of name_only > for pointers, and add missing Convention C pragma. > (print_ada_struct_decl): Add missing aliased keyword. > (dump_ads): Add pragma Ada_2005 and Style_Checks (Of

-fdump-ada-spec: misc small fixes

The following patch fixes various small "obvious" glitches in -fdump-ada-spec: - It adds a missing pragma Ada_2005; in the generate Ada files since the generated code expects Ada 2005 syntax - It adds a pragma Style_Checks (Off); to disable style checks on auto generated files - It fixes gener

[C++ Patch] PR 18747

Hi, here we want to reject meaningless things like: template<> int i; // { dg-error "template" } struct A { }; template<> A j; // { dg-error "template" } It seems to me that a good place to do that is toward the end of cp_parser_single_declaration, where we have only to be careful with

[Patch,libgcc]: Apply filter-out to fixed-bit.c

Hi, this patch adds support for LIB2FUNCS_EXCLUDE to the objects generated from fixed-bit.c Currently the backend has no means to filter out undesired functions like it is possible with LIB2FUNCS_EXCLUDE for the functions/objects from libgcc2.c I am planning to add fixed-point support for the avr

Re: PATCH: PR driver/54335: -dm doesn't work

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Hi, >> >> -dm hasn't worked for a long time, at least dating back to GCC 3.4. >> This patch removes -dm and puts back -da, which was removed by accident. >> OK to install? > > Ok. > > Th

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

Il 23/08/2012 13:46, rbmj ha scritto: > On 8/23/2012 4:24 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Some comments on the patches: >> >>> +c_fix_arg= "%0\n" >>> +"#define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ((ioctl)((fd), (func), >>> ((int)(arg\n"; >> This can be simply >> >> #define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ioc

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

On 8/23/2012 4:24 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Some comments on the patches: + c_fix_arg = "%0\n" + "#define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ((ioctl)((fd), (func), ((int)(arg\n"; This can be simply #define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ioctl(fd, func, (int)arg) thanks to C and cpp pre

Re: [PATCH] PR47440 - Use LCM for vzeroupper insertion

Hello! > avx-vzeroupper-3 fails because reload moves AVX store through vzeroupper. > > Before reload > (insn 2 27 3 2 (set (reg/v:V4DI 61 [ src ]) ... > After reload > (insn 6 3 29 2 (set (reg:QI 0 ax) > > I think it is data flow analyze problem. Uros refers to code at > df-scan.c, line 3248 .

Re: [doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

> During the expansion itself we have a mix of basic-blocks that are in RTL > and GIMPLE form. After expansion the CFG only contains RTL. The > sentence as-is is at least misleading, suggesting that after expansion > we have both RTL and GIMPLE in the CFG. > > So, on a second thought a more appr

[PATCH] Avoid virtual operand SSA update when vectorizing

As promised here is a simple patch to keep the vectorizer from making virtual SSA form out-of-date in 99% of all cases and thus avoid an update_ssa call. 99% in that this survives vect.exp testing with the TODO_update_ssa removed from both the loop and basic-block vectorization passes. Still the

Re: [doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) wrote: > Hi Richard, > >> +representation. So the CFG simultaneously consist of basic blocks >> +containing RTL and GIMPLE trees. >> >> That last sentence is not correct, please remove it. Ok with that change. > > May I ask why the last sente

Re: [doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

Hi Richard, > +representation. So the CFG simultaneously consist of basic blocks > +containing RTL and GIMPLE trees. > > That last sentence is not correct, please remove it. Ok with that change. May I ask why the last sentence is not correct? (just want to know why) The comment of gimple_expa

Re: [PATCH] fix wrong-code bug for -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote: > On 2012/8/23 05:08, Richard Guenther wrote: >>> First of all the warning should be probably issued from stor-layout.c >>> itself - see >>> other cases where we warn about packed structs. Yes, that means you'll >>> get the warning even when

Re: [doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) wrote: > Hi Richard, > > Could you review this patch, too? > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01003.html +representation. So the CFG simultaneously consist of basic blocks +containing RTL and GIMPLE trees. That last sentence is

Re: [PATCH] PR47440 - Use LCM for vzeroupper insertion

Hello! > 2012-08-25 Vladimir Yakovlev > > * config/epiphany/epiphany.h (EMIT_MODE_SET): Added an argument. > > * config/i386/i386-protos.h (emit_i387_cw_initialization): > Deleted > (emit_vzero): Added prototype > (ix86_mode_entry): Likewise > (ix

Re: [C++ patch] PR 20420

On 08/23/2012 10:00 AM, Fabien Chêne wrote: Thanks for tackling this "using" bug ! You are welcome! Incidentally, as you seem to be used to visiting old C++ bugs, feel free to ping/assign me on bugs that concern using-declarations -- obviously if you do not plan to fix it yourself (which is a

Re: [PATCH] fix wrong-code bug for -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

On 2012/8/23 05:08, Richard Guenther wrote: >> First of all the warning should be probably issued from stor-layout.c >> itself - see >> other cases where we warn about packed structs. Yes, that means you'll >> get the warning even when there is no access but you'll only get it a >> single time. >>

Re: [PATCH] Fix memory leak in Fortran FE with init_emit (take 2)

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:24:26AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > Perhaps it would make sense to commit the fortran/ change separately to fix > > the leak in there, and resolve the rest in a follow-up when it is clear what > > to do in the C++ FE. > > Yes. Does the copy_node change pass testi

[doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

Hi Richard, Could you review this patch, too? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01003.html Thanks! Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.) Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667 Homepage: http://people.c

Re: [doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Mingjie Xing wrote: > Hi, > > A very small patch. OK? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > 2012-08-23 Mingjie Xing > > * doc/gty.texi: Fix typo. > > Index: doc/gty.texi > === > --- doc/gty.texi

Re: [PATCH] Fix memory leak in Fortran FE with init_emit (take 2)

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 03:29:28PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > init_function_start is these days supposed to be called only at the start >> > of >> > RTL expansion, it shouldn

Re: [PATCH] fix wrong-code bug for -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: >> On 08/22/2012 03:27 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: + bool packedp = false; + + if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF +&& (TYPE_PACKED

Re: [PATCH] fix wrong-code bug for -fstrict-volatile-bitfields

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 08/22/2012 03:27 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> >>> + bool packedp = false; >>> + >>> + if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF >>> +&& (TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 0))) >>> >>> + || (

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

Il 23/08/2012 10:35, Jay Foad ha scritto: >> > This can be simply >> > >> > #define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ioctl(fd, func, (int)arg) > "(int)(arg)", surely. Right, only the other parentheses are unnecessary. (Cut-and-paste mistake). Paolo

Re: PATCH: PR driver/54335: -dm doesn't work

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Hi, > > -dm hasn't worked for a long time, at least dating back to GCC 3.4. > This patch removes -dm and puts back -da, which was removed by accident. > OK to install? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks. > > > H.J. > --- > 2012-08-22 H.J. Lu > >

[v3] correction to C++11 status table

PR libstdc++/54354 * doc/xml/manual/status_cxx2011.xml: Note missing manipulators. * doc/html/*: Regenerate. Committed to trunk.

[doc] Fix typo in gty.texi

Hi, A very small patch. OK? 2012-08-23 Mingjie Xing * doc/gty.texi: Fix typo. Index: doc/gty.texi === --- doc/gty.texi(revision 190611) +++ doc/gty.texi(working copy) @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ The GCC build tr

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

On 23 August 2012 09:24, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 23/08/2012 04:27, rbmj ha scritto: >> + c_fix_arg = "%0\n" >> + "#define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ((ioctl)((fd), (func), >> ((int)(arg\n"; > > This can be simply > > #define ioctl(fd, func, arg) ioctl(fd, func, (int)arg) "(

Re: VxWorks Patches Back from the Dead!

Il 23/08/2012 04:27, rbmj ha scritto: >> >> sed '/if test -s .{MACRO_LIST}/s/$/ && false/' \ >> ${srcdir}/fixinc.in > ${target} >> >> for vxworks rather than all that configury rigmarole. >> That would eliminate changes to gcc/configure.ac and gcc/Makefile.in. > > I didn't even think of tha

Re: [C++ patch] PR 20420

Hi Paolo, 2012/8/23 Jason Merrill : [...] >> The below passes testing, anyway. > > > OK. > > Jason Thanks for tackling this "using" bug ! Incidentally, as you seem to be used to visiting old C++ bugs, feel free to ping/assign me on bugs that concern using-declarations -- obviously if you do not p

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Virtual operands in loop-closed SSA form

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > + The same applies to virtual operands which are also rewritten into > + loop closed SSA form. Note that virtual operands are always live > + until function exit. Ouch! What does this do to the memory foot print and com

[PATCH] Fix memory leak in Fortran FE with init_emit (take 2)

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 03:29:28PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > init_function_start is these days supposed to be called only at the start of > > RTL expansion, it shouldn't be called much earlier, because then we leak > > e.g. the memor

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Virtual operands in loop-closed SSA form

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > > While we should already be in loop-closed SSA form for virtual > > operands most of the time (because we have a virtual use at > > the return statement) and loop-closed SSA form for virt