C++ PATCH to implement C++11 inheriting constructors

This patch implements the C++11 inheriting constructors feature: given struct A { A(int); }; struct B { using A::A; }; the compiler defines B::B(int) that just passes its argument along to the A constructor. Ville started working on this feature a while back, but got tied up with other thing

C++ PATCH for target/54908 (thread_local vs emutls)

This patch completely rewrites atexit_thread.cc to use __gthread_getspecific/setspecific rather than a thread_local variable to store the cleanup list, so that the list won't vanish if emutls_destroy runs first. With this patch all the TLS tests pass on i686-pc-linux-gnu configured with --disa

Re: Ping: RFA: Fix OP_INOUT handling of web.c:union_match_dups

Il 15/10/2012 07:10, Joern Rennecke ha scritto: > 2012-10-02 Joern Rennecke > > * web.c (union_match_dups): Properly handle OP_INOUT match_dups. > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00189.html > Ok. Paolo

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 14/10/2012 22:59, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Can we just simulate liveness for web, and drop REG_EQUAL/REG_EQUIV >> notes that refer to a dead pseudo? > > I don't think we want to do that. A REG_EQUAL/REG_EQUIV note can use a > pseudo

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

> > The only versions of the Solaris assembler I have access to only support > > v8plusX according to the man page. Has that changed recently? > > For the older stuff I mean doing something like "-m32 -xarch=v9X" OK, this is for fbe, not for as. I think that the latter is always available on t

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I don't think we want to do that. A REG_EQUAL/REG_EQUIV note can use a >> pseudo that isn't live and still be valid. Consider a simple example >> like this: >> >> a = b + 3 >> // b dies here >> c = a {REG_EQUAL b+3} >> >> The REG_EQUAL note i

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 15/10/2012 10:13, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: > > I disagree that it is valid. At least it is risky to consider it valid, > > because a pass that simulates liveness might end up doing something > > wrong because of that note. If simulation is done backwards, it doesn't > > even require any int

[SH] PR 54760 - Add DImode GBR loads/stores, fix optimization

Hello, I somehow initially forgot to implement DImode GBR based loads/stores. Attached patch does that and also fixes a problem with the GBR address mode optimization. Tested on rev 192417 with make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m

[SH] PR 51244 - Catch more unnecessary sign/zero extensions

Hello, This one refactors some copy pasta that my previous patch regarding this matter introduced and catches more unnecessary sign/zero extensions of T bit stores. It also fixes the bug reported in PR 54925 which popped up after the last patch for PR 51244. Tested on rev 192417 with make -k chec

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > I prefer to declare the notes invalid and drop the notes. Then, afaic, our only option is to drop them all in web, as per attached patch. I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information that is correct, that we had be

Re: [PATCH] Fix up vector CONSTRUCTOR verification ICE (PR tree-optimization/54889)

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > Apparently vectorizable_load is another spot that could create vector > CONSTRUCTORs that wouldn't pass the new CONSTRUCTOR verification. > > Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, > ok for trunk? You sh

[SH] PR 54925 - Add test case

Hello, This adds the test case from the PR. Tested together with the patch posted here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01380.html OK? Cheers, Oleg testsuite/ChangeLog: PR target/54925 * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54925.c: New. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compil

Re: Move statements upwards after reassociation

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Easwaran Raman wrote: >>> Thanks for the comments. As David wrote, the intent of the patch is >>> not to do a general purpose scheduling, but to c

Re: PR54915 (ssa-forwprop, vec_perm_expr)

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Marc Glisse wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> apparently, in the optimization that recognizes that {v[1],v[0]} is a >> VEC_PERM_EXPR, I forgot to check that v is a 2-element vector... (not that >> there aren't things that could be

Re: [patch][wwwdocs] gcc 4.8 changes - mention scalability improvements

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > This patch adds a short notice about some speed-ups in GCC 4.8 for > extremely large functions (coming from the work done on PR54146 by > several people). > OK for the wwwdocs? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Ciao! > Steven > > > > In

Re: [patch] Back-port ifcvt.c changes from PR54146

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > This patch is a back-port of one of the scalability improvements I > made to perform, well, maybe not well but at least not so poorly on > the test case of PR54146, which has an extremely large function. > > The problem in ifcvt

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > This is the execution failure of gfortran.dg/array_constructor_4.f90 in 64-bit > mode on SPARC/Solaris at -O3. The dse2 dump for the reduced testcase reads: > > dse: local deletions = 0, global deletions = 1, spill deletions = 0 > s

Re: [PATCH] Fix gcov handling directories with periods

On 10/15/2012 05:00 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Ian Lance Taylor writes: >> >>> Suppose you drop this into include/libiberty.h: >>> >>> #ifdef __cplusplus >>> inline char *lbasename(char *s) { return const_cast(lbasename (s)); } >>> #end

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

> Hmm. I think this points to an issue with update_alias_info_with_stack_vars > instead. That is, this function should have already cared for handling > this case where two decls have their stack slot shared. The problem here is that mark_addressable is called _after_ the function is run. IOW,

Re: [PATCH, AARCH64] Added predefines for AArch64 code models

On 11/09/12 15:02, Chris Schlumberger-Socha wrote: This patch adds predefines for AArch64 code models. These code models are added as an effective target for the AArch64 platform. I've committed this patch to aarch64-trunk. /Marcus

Re: Constant-fold vector comparisons

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Sat, 29 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote: > >> 1) it handles constant folding of vector comparisons, >> >> 2) it fixes another place where vectors are not expected > > > Here is a new version of this patch. > > In a first try, I got bitten by the

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Hmm. I think this points to an issue with update_alias_info_with_stack_vars >> instead. That is, this function should have already cared for handling >> this case where two decls have their stack slot shared. > > The problem here is that

[PATCH][LTO] Move more non-tree pieces to bitfields

This moves more non-tree fields out of the tree streaming routines into the bitfield parts. One to go: strings. LTO bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2012-10-15 Richard Guenther * tree-streamer-out.c (streamer_pack_tree_bitfields): Back

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I prefer to declare the notes invalid and drop the notes. > > I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information > that is correct, that we had before DF_RD_PRUN

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

> Where is mark_addressable called? It's wrong (and generally impossible) to > do that late. In expr.c:emit_block_move_hints. It's one of the calls added to support the enhanced DSE last year, there are others in calls.c for example. > If you only have memcpy then escaped will be empty. fixin

Fix double write of unchecked conversion to volatile variable

For the attached Ada testcase, the compiler generates a double write to the volatile variable at -O1. The problem is a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR on the rhs. We have in store_expr: If TEMP and TARGET compare equal according to rtx_equal_p, but one or both of them are volatile memory refs, we h

Re: [lra] patch from Richard Sandiford's review of lra-constraints.c

Thanks for the updates, they look good to me. Vladimir Makarov writes: > @@ -100,8 +102,9 @@ >o for pseudos needing save/restore code around calls. > > If the split pseudo still has the same hard register as the > -original pseudo after the subsequent assignment pass, the oppos

Re: [patch] Fix PR rtl-optimization/54870

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Where is mark_addressable called? It's wrong (and generally impossible) to >> do that late. > > In expr.c:emit_block_move_hints. It's one of the calls added to support the > enhanced DSE last year, there are others in calls.c for example.

[PATCH] Fix PR54920

This fixes PR54920. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied on trunk and the 4.7 branch. Richard. 2012-10-15 Richard Guenther PR tree-optimization/54920 * tree-ssa-pre.c (create_expression_by_pieces): Properly allocate temporary storage for all N

Re: [SH] Document function attributes

Oleg Endo wrote: > The attached patch adds documentation for SH specific function > attributes which haven't been documented yet. > Tested with 'make info dvi pdf'. > OK? OK. Regards, kaz

Re: [SH] PR 34777 - Add test case

Oleg Endo wrote: > The attached patch adds gcc.target/sh/torture and puts the test there. > The torture subdir might be also useful in the future. > Tested on rev 192417 with > make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim\{-m2/-ml}" > > OK? OK. Regards, kaz

Re: [SH] PR 54760 - Add DImode GBR loads/stores, fix optimization

Oleg Endo wrote: > I somehow initially forgot to implement DImode GBR based loads/stores. > Attached patch does that and also fixes a problem with the GBR address > mode optimization. > Tested on rev 192417 with > make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim > \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-

Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Refactor Advanced SIMD builtin initialisation.

On 05/10/12 16:52, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This patch refactors the initialisation code for the Advanced SIMD builtins under the AArch64 target. The patch has been regression tested on aarch64-none-elf. OK for aarch64-branch? (If yes, someone will have to commit this for me as I do not ha

Re: [SH] PR 51244 - Catch more unnecessary sign/zero extensions

Oleg Endo wrote: > This one refactors some copy pasta that my previous patch regarding this > matter introduced and catches more unnecessary sign/zero extensions of T > bit stores. It also fixes the bug reported in PR 54925 which popped up > after the last patch for PR 51244. > Tested on rev 1924

Re: Ping^2: RFA: Process '*' in '@'-output-template alternatives

On 10/15/2012 06:41 AM, Joern Rennecke wrote: > The following patch is still awaiting review: > > 2011-09-19 J"orn Rennecke > > * genoutput.c (process_template): Process '*' in '@' alternatives. > * doc/md.texi (node Output Statement): Provide example for the > above. > > http

Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Add vcond, vcondu support.

On 09/10/12 12:08, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This patch adds support for vcond and vcondu to the AArch64 backend. Tested with no regressions on aarch64-none-elf. OK for aarch64-branch? (If so, someone will have to commit for me, as I do not have commit rights.) Thanks James Greenhalgh --

Re: [SH] PR 54925 - Add test case

Oleg Endo wrote: > This adds the test case from the PR. > Tested together with the patch posted here > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01380.html > > OK? It would be better to make it a valid C program. I've checked that the test case with the change below also ICEs on revision 192

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 15/10/2012 10:37, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: >> I prefer to declare the notes invalid and drop the notes. > Then, afaic, our only option is to drop them all in web, as per attached > patch. > > I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information > that is correct, that we ha

Re: RFC: LRA for x86/x86-64 [7/9] -- continuation

Vladimir Makarov writes: >> if that's accurate. I dropped the term "reload pseudo" because of >> the general comment in my earlier reply about the use of "reload pseudo" >> when the code seems to include inheritance and split pseudos too. > There is no inheritance and splitting yet. It is done a

[path] PR 54900: store data race in if-conversion pass

[Ian, I am copying you because this is originally your code. Richard, I am copying you because you are all things aliased :-). And Andrew is here because I am unable to come up with a suitable test for the simulate-thread harness.]. Here we have a store data race because noce_can_store_specu

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has three pro

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

Hi Janne, thanks for the review. On 2012-10-14 23:35, Janne Blomqvist wrote: - Personally, I'd prefer the C++ version; The C++ standard library is widely used and documented and using it in favour of rolling our own is IMHO a good idea. - I'd be vary wrt backporting, in my experience the modu

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I strongly disagree with this approach though. It destroys information >> that is correct, that we had before DF_RD_PRUNE_DEAD_DEFS, that we can >> update, and that helps with optimization. With renaming these notes >> are valid, and do not r

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++] Fix missing gthr-default.h issue on libstdc++ configure

>> Looks Ok. If David can test is successfully on AIX I can approve it. > > I was able to bootstrap successfully with the patch. Checked in: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00581.html Thanks, K

[PATCH] Cleanup comments in alias.c

Hello, While reading alias.c, it seemed to me that some comments could use some cleanups. OK for trunk? Thanks. gcc/ * alias.c: Cleanup comments. --- gcc/alias.c | 27 +-- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/alias.c b/gcc/alias.c

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

Il 15/10/2012 14:53, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: > I think I've shown above that we're all looking at the wrong pass... I think you have... so we want a patch like this? Index: df-problems.c === --- df-problems.c (revisione 183

Re: Fix twolf -funroll-loops -O3 miscompilation (a semi-latent web.c bug)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 15/10/2012 14:53, Steven Bosscher ha scritto: >> I think I've shown above that we're all looking at the wrong pass... > > I think you have... so we want a patch like this? I don't think so. df_kill_notes is already supposed to take care o

Re: [PATCH] Cleanup comments in alias.c

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Hello, > > While reading alias.c, it seemed to me that some comments could use > some cleanups. > > OK for trunk? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks. > > gcc/ > > * alias.c: Cleanup comments. > --- > gcc/alias.c | 27 +--

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++] Fix missing gthr-default.h issue on libstdc++ configure

On Oct 15, 2012, at 15:12 , Kirill Yukhin wrote: >> I was able to bootstrap successfully with the patch. > > Checked in: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00581.html Thanks :)

Re: Constant-fold vector comparisons

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote: else if ((code == BIT_NOT_EXPR && TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (cond)) == 1) || (code == BIT_XOR_EXPR - && integer_onep (gimple_assign_rhs2 (def_stmt + && ((gimple_assign_rhs_code

Re: [path] PR 54900: store data race in if-conversion pass

On 10/15/2012 08:28 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: I am having a bit of a problem coming up with a generic testcase. Perhaps Andrew or others have an idea. The attached testcase fails to trigger without the patch, because AFAICT we have no way of testing an addition of zero to a memory location:

[PATCH] Last LTO streaming adjustment

This moves TRANSLATION_UNIT_LANGUAGE to the bitpack section. LTO bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Richard. 2012-10-15 Richard Biener * data-streamer.h (bp_pack_string_with_length): New function. (bp_pack_string): Likewise. (bp_unpack_indexed_strin

Re: [patch] [gcc/libgcc/ada/libstdc++] Match arm*-*-linux-*eabi* for ARM Linux/GNU EABI

On 26.06.2012 11:10, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 25/06/12 22:30, Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 25.06.2012 18:21, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> On 25.06.2012 15:22, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 13:08, Matthias Klose wrote: > gcc/config.gcc now allows matching arm*-*-linux-*eabi* instead o

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

Eric Botcazou writes: >> > The only versions of the Solaris assembler I have access to only support >> > v8plusX according to the man page. Has that changed recently? >> >> For the older stuff I mean doing something like "-m32 -xarch=v9X" > > OK, this is for fbe, not for as. I think that the l

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

David Miller writes: > Could one of you help me get the solaris side correct? I made sure > that binutils accepts the same options for this stuff, that's why > I can unconditionally use '-xarch=sparc4' in the configure test. I assume this works because gas 2.22 had neither SPARC-T4 support nor

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

Ian Lance Taylor writes: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >> I don't see how can their testcase be used if not converted to Dejagnu >> though, most of their testcases are full of LLVM testcase markup >> (// RUN, // CHECK*, etc.). So, if we import the library unmodified

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Eric Botcazou Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:00:02 +0200 >> > The only versions of the Solaris assembler I have access to only support >> > v8plusX according to the man page. Has that changed recently? >> >> For the older stuff I mean doing something like "-m32 -xarch=v9X" > > OK, this is for

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

David Miller writes: >>> I'm just calling it VIS4 in GCC so that we can export intrinsics of, >>> for example, the cryptographic instructions at some point using the >>> __VIS__ version CPP tests. >> >> ...that's why I'm not sure we should invent VIS4 at this point. How is this >> done on the

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Rainer Orth Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:28:15 +0200 > David Miller writes: > >> Could one of you help me get the solaris side correct? I made sure >> that binutils accepts the same options for this stuff, that's why >> I can unconditionally use '-xarch=sparc4' in the configure test. > > I

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add support for sparc compare-and-branch.

From: Rainer Orth Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:44:44 +0200 > David Miller writes: > I'm just calling it VIS4 in GCC so that we can export intrinsics of, for example, the cryptographic instructions at some point using the __VIS__ version CPP tests. >>> >>> ...that's why I'm not sure

[C++ Patch] PR 50080

Hi, thus, if I understand correctly the resolution of Core/468 [CD1], we can simplify a bit the parser and just accept these 'template' outside templates. Tested x86_64-linux. Thanks, Paolo. /// /cp 2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini PR c++/50080 * parser.c (cp_

Re: [patch] [gcc/libgcc/ada/libstdc++] Match arm*-*-linux-*eabi* for ARM Linux/GNU EABI

On 15/10/12 15:20, Matthias Klose wrote: On 26.06.2012 11:10, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 22:30, Matthias Klose wrote: On 25.06.2012 18:21, Matthias Klose wrote: On 25.06.2012 15:22, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On 25/06/12 13:08, Matthias Klose wrote: gcc/config.gcc now allows matching a

RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

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. It is our goal to integrate the GUPC changes into the GCC 4.8 trunk, in order to provide a UPC (Unified Parallel C) capability in the subsequent GCC 4.8

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Gary Funck wrote: > 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. > > It is our goal to integrate the GUPC changes into the GCC 4.8 > trunk, in order to provide a

Re: [PATCH] Rs6000 infrastructure cleanup (switches), revised patch #4

On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Michael Meissner wrote: > I decided to see if it was possible to simplify the change over by adding > another flag word in the .opt handling to give the old names (TARGET_ and > MASK_). For Joseph Myers and Neil Booth, the issue is when changing all > of the switches that use

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Ian Lance Taylor writes: > >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> >>> I don't see how can their testcase be used if not converted to Dejagnu >>> though, most of their testcases are full of LLVM testcase markup >>> (// RU

Ping^2 Re: Defining C99 predefined macros for whole translation unit

Ping^2. This patch (non-C parts) is still pending review. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On 10/15/12 17:51:14, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Gary Funck wrote: [...] > > UPC-Related Front-End Changes > > - > > > > GCC's internal tree representation is > > extended to record the UPC "shared", > > "strict", "relaxed" qualifiers, >

Re: [asan] Emit GIMPLE directly, small cleanups

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > In my opinion, supporting the full range of GCC testsuite annotations > means imposing a lot of mechanism that the Go testsuite does not > require. It would complicate the Go testsuite for no benefit. > Anybody who can understand the GC

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

OK. Jason

Re: [PATCH] Rs6000 infrastructure cleanup (switches), revised patch #4

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 03:52:01PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Michael Meissner wrote: > > > I decided to see if it was possible to simplify the change over by adding > > another flag word in the .opt handling to give the old names (TARGET_ > > and > > MASK_). For Joseph

Re: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue

Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this > > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned > > value and one to *store* and unaligned value, and not permit th

[patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

Hello, GCC has hard_reg_set_iterator to iterate quickly over a HARD_REG_SET, but it's not used a lot. Attached patch makes a few files use it to iterate over regs_invalidated_by_call. If this is OK, I'd like to convert loops over HARD_REG_SETs to iterators where possible. Bootstrapped&tested on x

Re: RFC: LRA for x86/x86-64 [7/9] -- continuation

Hi Vlad, Some comments about the rest of LRA. Nothing major here... Vladimir Makarov writes: > +/* Info about register in an insn. */ > +struct lra_insn_reg > +{ > + /* The biggest mode through which the insn refers to the register > + (remember the register can be accessed through a subr

[Cilkplus] Merged with trunk at revision 192446.

Cilk Plus branch was merged with trunk at revision 192446. Committed as revision 192464. Thanks, Balaji V. Iyer.

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > Various UPC language related checks and operations > are called in the "C" front-end and middle-end. > To insure that these operations are defined, > when linked with the other language front-ends > and compilers, these functions are stub-ed, > in a fashion

[PATCH][AArch64] Restrict usage of SBFIZ to valid range only

This fixes an issue where we were generating an SBFIZ with operand 3 outside of the valid range (as determined by the size of the destination register and the amount of shift). My patch checks that the range is valid before allowing the pattern to be used. This has now had full regression testing

Re: [libcpp] Free some variables

> "Tobias" == Tobias Burnus writes: Tobias> Build on x86-64-linux with C/C++/Fortran. I will now do an Tobias> all-language build/regtest. Tobias> OK when it passes? Tobias> 2012-10-03 Tobias Burnus Tobias> * files.c (read_file_guts, _cpp_save_file_entries): Free memory Tobias>

Re: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this >> > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned >> > value and one to *sto

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

Actually, let's keep the diagnostic when compiling with -pedantic in 98 mode. Jason

[lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find it as the operand and insn template operand has VOIDmode. There are still cases wh

Re: RFC: C++ PATCH to support dynamic initialization and destruction of C++11 and OpenMP TLS variables

On 10/05/2012 10:38 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 10/05/2012 04:29 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: Or if we have the extra indirection via a reference anyway, we could have a pointer TLS variable (NULL initialized) that on the first access will trap where in a trap handler we could then perform initia

Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has three pro

[RFC] Fix spill failure at -O on 64-bit Windows

(reg:SI 43 r14 [175]) (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 17 flags) (nil)) +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+ | 4.8.0 20121015 (experimental) [trunk revision 192447] (x86_64-pc-mingw32) GCC error:| | in spill_failure, at reload1.c:2124

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 17805

OK. Jason

Re: [RFC] Fix spill failure at -O on 64-bit Windows

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > This extends the lifetime of the hard register up to the beginning of the > function, causing reload to die on the complex division instruction. Does this still happen after my patch from yesterday to use DF_LIVE in IRA? > The attached patc

[c-family] Fix -fdump-ada-spec buglet in C++

Hi, since the sizetype change, we generate invalid Ada for flexible array members with -fdump-ada-spec in C++. The attached patch fixes this issue and also partially revamps the code to polish some rough edges. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, OK for mainline? 2012-10-15 Eric Botcazou c-fami

Re: [patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > GCC has hard_reg_set_iterator to iterate quickly over a HARD_REG_SET, > but it's not used a lot. Attached patch makes a few files use it to > iterate over regs_invalidated_by_call. If this is OK, I'd like to > convert loops over H

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

On 10/15/2012 07:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: Actually, let's keep the diagnostic when compiling with -pedantic in 98 mode. ... too late! ;) So I prepared the below, I'm finishing testing it. Thanks, Paolo. // /cp 2012-10-15 Paolo Carlini PR c++/50080 (again)

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 50080

On 10/15/2012 11:33 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: + && pedantic && cxx_dialect == cxx98) + { + cp_token *token = cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer); + error_at (token->location, + "in C++98 % (as a disambiguator) is only " + "allowed w

Re: Propagate profile counts during switch expansion

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > > Index: optabs.c > === > --- optabs.c(revision 191879) > +++ optabs.c(working copy) > @@ -4249,7 +4249,7 @@ prepare_operand (enum insn_code icode, rtx x, int > w

[PATCH, i386]: Split unaligned SSE move to unaligned load/store (Was: [RFC] find_reloads_subreg_address rework triggers i386 back-end issue)

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > I was wondering if the i386 port maintainers could have a look at this >> > pattern. Shouldn't we really have two patterns, one to *load* an unaligned >> > value and one to *store* and unaligned value, and not permit that memory >> > ac

Re: [patch] Use hard_reg_set_iterator in a few places

Steven Bosscher writes: > * combine.c (record_dead_and_set_regs): Iterate over hard register set > with a hard_reg_set_iterator. > * cse.c (invalidate_for_call): Likewise. > * gcse.c (compute_hash_table_work): Likewise. > * loop-iv.c (simplify_using_initial_values): L

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

Vladimir Makarov writes: >After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a > review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find > a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find > it as the operand and insn template operand has V

Re: RFC: C++ PATCH to support dynamic initialization and destruction of C++11 and OpenMP TLS variables

domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) writes: > On x86_64-apple-darwin10 The following tests: > > g++.dg/gomp/tls-5.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local-cse.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order*.C > g++.dg/tls/thread_local*g.C > > fail with > > sorry, unimplemented: dynamic initialization of non-function-lo

Re: Ping: RFA: add lock_length attribute to break branch-shortening cycles

Joern Rennecke writes: > 2012-10-04 Joern Rennecke > > * final.c (get_attr_length_1): Use direct recursion rather than > calling get_attr_length. > (get_attr_lock_length): New function. > (INSN_VARIABLE_LENGTH_P): Define. > (shorten_branches): Take H

Re: [lra] patch to revert a code from previous patch.

Richard Sandiford writes: > Vladimir Makarov writes: >>After committing a patch yesterday to implement proposals from a >> review, I found that GCC crashes on SPEC2000 gap. LRA is trying to find >> a mode of operand (const_int 1) in *lea_general_1 insn and can not find >> it as the operan

Re: RFC: Merge the GUPC branch into the GCC 4.8 trunk (patch 0 of 16)

On 10/15/12 17:06:28, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > > Various UPC language related checks and operations > > are called in the "C" front-end and middle-end. > > To insure that these operations are defined, > > when linked with the other language front-ends > > an

[PATCH] Install error handler for out-of-memory when using STL containers Re: PR fortran/51727: make module files reproducible, question on C++ in gcc

Hi, On 2012-10-14 23:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:35:27AM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Tobias Schlüter I'm putting forward two patches. One uses a C++ map to very concisely build up and handle the ordered list of symbols. This has thr

Re: [PATCH] Reduce conservativeness in REE using machine model (issue6631066)

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:44:12PM -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote: >> Revised patch to address conservative behavior in redundant extend >> elimination that was resulting in redundant extends not being >> removed. Now uses a new target hook mach

  1   2   >