I've committed attached patch on google/gcc-4_8 branch to fix testsuite
failures broken by r199468.
Thanks,
--
Paul Pluzhnikov
Index:
libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/vector/requirements/dr438/assign_neg.cc
===
---
libstdc++-
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Ok. I think this is a useful patch for trunk too.
Agreed, I will send it up to trunk too. In the meantime it is now in google/4_8.
Thanks,
Teresa
>
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>> Test
Hello Everyone,
When I was looking at the erroneous test on PR 57452, I found out that
array notations in conditions were not expanded correctly. The rank for the
array notation condition must be same (or equal to zero) as the rank of the
array notations inside the else-block and then-bl
Ok. I think this is a useful patch for trunk too.
Thanks,
David
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> Testing passed. I forgot to include the documentation change in the first
> patch:
>
> Index: doc/invoke.texi
> =
Testing passed. I forgot to include the documentation change in the first patch:
Index: doc/invoke.texi
===
--- doc/invoke.texi (revision 199426)
+++ doc/invoke.texi (working copy)
@@ -6219,7 +6219,7 @@ Controls optimization d
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> OK. Is this applicable to trunk and/or release branches?
No: the "cheap" vector and string checks are on google branches only.
--
Paul Pluzhnikov
This patch reduces the copious -fopt-info output by making the default for
-fopt-info to be -fopt-info=optimized instead of -fopt-info=all. It also
changes most of the vectorizer messages to use MSG_NOTE instead of
MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATION.
Reduced the output of -fopt-info for one application by >75
On 2013-05-30 18:19 , Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
Ok for google/gcc_4-7, gcc-4_8 and integration branches?
OK. Is this applicable to trunk and/or release branches?
Diego.
Yes, patch updated:
Testing on-going.
Dehao
Index: gimple-low.c
===
--- gimple-low.c (revision 199414)
+++ gimple-low.c (working copy)
@@ -254,6 +254,8 @@
&& !fold_convertible_p (DECL_ARG_TYPE (p), arg)))
return fals
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:03:51AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Michael Meissner
> wrote:
>
>
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Only
> > allow power8 quad mode in 64-bit. Turn off splitting wide types
> > i
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> This patch makes more strict check of call args to make sure the
> number of args match.
>
> Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
>
> OK for google branches?
>
> Thanks,
> Dehao
>
> Index: gcc/gimple-low.c
>
This patch makes more strict check of call args to make sure the
number of args match.
Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
OK for google branches?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/gimple-low.c
===
--- gcc/gimple-low.c (revision 19941
Greetings,
The vector validity checks introduced here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg00415.html
proved too strict: older versions of GCC used to do this:
_M_start = _M_end = _M_end_of_storage = new_allocator(sizeof(T) * n)
even when n == 0, and we have code compiled by such ver
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 5:02 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: David Edelsohn; Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; 'Joseph
> S. Myers'; gcc-patches
> Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for
Hello Everyone,
One of the test in Cilk Plus array notation execution test for C was
wrong. Here is a fixed one:
Here is the Change log entry for it:
2013-05-30 Balaji V. Iyer
PR c/57452
* c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c: Fixed out of bounds issue in
test-
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 15:13 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Matt Burgess
> wrote:
> >
> > 2013-05-22 Matt Burgess
> >
> > other/PR56780
> > * libiberty/configure.ac: Move test for --enable-install-libiberty
> > outside of the 'with_target_
Hi Janus,
Janus Weil wrote:
In addition to this, the patch contains a part which concerns the
function 'gfc_terminal_width': Currently this returns a fixed value of
80, which means that all source lines are trimmed to 80 characters in
the error messages. I increased this default value to 132 (in
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:02:27PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>error: __sec_reduce_min_ind or __sec_reduce_max_ind cannot have arrays
> >>with dimension greater than 1
> >
> >Same as above for this also.
> Not sure about this one. It's possible (I'd have to sit down with
> dg.exp for a while) that
Andrew Sutton writes:
| I presented that at C++Now, so I hope so :) It lets me write:
|
| template
| requires Input_iterator // no parens!
| void f(T x);
|
| Walter Brown also suggested this usage in his object alias paper.
|
| In concepts lite, a concept is essentially an expression. Th
On May 30, 2013, at 15:44 , Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> In other words, this change will impact basically all targets, so needs
> either much more testing, or more review, which is on going.
Part of the issue comes from the need to support some targets
with non-canonical names (in the configure --
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:07:32AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> [gcc/testsuite]
> 2013-05-20 Michael Meissner
>
> * gcc.target/powerpc/crypto-builtin-1.c: New file, test for power8
> crypto builtins.
>
> The testcase needs to check something more than
>
> /* { dg-require-eff
On 05/30/2013 02:13 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hi David,
Please see my response below:
-Original Message-
From: David Edelsohn [mailto:dje@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:44 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Jos
On 05/30/2013 02:38 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
I am a bit lost. The code quoted above is the old code - just moved down
a bit. It is supposed to handle powi(x,n) for unknown x with known n -
while the new code handles x == -1.0 for unknown n. Thus,
gimple_expand_builtin_powi should be unreachable
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 04:20:46PM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> Investigating size increase of LRA generated code on PPC64 (> 0.2%
> on SPEC2006), I found that register usage leveling can hurt
> cross-jumping optimization for ppc besides if-conversion one for
> targets with conditional execut
I presented that at C++Now, so I hope so :) It lets me write:
template
requires Input_iterator // no parens!
void f(T x);
Walter Brown also suggested this usage in his object alias paper.
In concepts lite, a concept is essentially an expression. Thus far,
we've packaged those expressions i
Jeff Law wrote:
On 05/30/2013 12:08 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
+}
+ else
+{
+ if (!host_integerp (arg1, 0))
+break;
+
+ n = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1);
+ result = gimple_expand_builtin_powi (&gsi, loc, arg0, n);
+
On 05/30/2013 03:17 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:
| - /* 1 spare bit */
| + unsigned concept_p : 1; /* var or fn */
| + /* 0 spare bit */
| };
Hmm I don't understand the comment "var or fn".
If it is declared a concept, how can it it be a var?
Copied from the other bits in the
Investigating size increase of LRA generated code on PPC64 (> 0.2% on
SPEC2006), I found that register usage leveling can hurt cross-jumping
optimization for ppc besides if-conversion one for targets with
conditional execution.
So I decided to introduce a machine target hook switching on the
I'll clean it up and commit tomorrow morning.
> Once you've committed the patch, let me know so I can synchronize with
> trunk -- or is there another patch coming in this week?
I'm hoping to get all of the function-related functionality sent off
by tomorrow or Saturday. I found a showstopper in t
Hi David,
Please see my response below:
> -Original Message-
> From: David Edelsohn [mailto:dje@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:44 AM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Joseph S.
> Myers'; gcc-patches
> Subject
Andrew Sutton writes:
| > * Check against cxx11 dialect, not cxx0x.
|
| Let's talk about this tomorrow. I'm not quite sure how to do this.
|
| > * Any particular reason to use classes with operator() for the
| > parseers and the combinators? GCC can inline indirect calls to
| > fun
Here is a patch from our backlog that addresses a libitm issue where
setting ENABLE_LTO=1 in site.exp causes the following error with dejagnu:
ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "libitm_target_compile linker_plugin19344.c
linker_plugin19344.exe executable {{additional_flags=-flto
-fuse-linker-plugin}}" does
Here is a patch from our backlog at Mentor Graphics that addresses a
libgomp issue where setting ENABLE_LTO=1 in site.exp causes the following
error with dejagnu:
ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "libgomp_target_compile linker_plugin9263.c
linker_plugin9263.exe executable {{additional_flags=-flto
-fuse-l
sort_mem_initializers was skipping over all fields without a
mem-initializer, even ones with an NSDMI.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 25b01320a7aefae42d9e14f3807247ca8f88ae40
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Sat May 25 17:28:15 2013 -0400
PR c++/52377
* class.c (c
The anonymous struct type that I'm using for VLA capture doesn't have
TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 8cc312abec2ea0f134d6991c0c8e7a070ce611db
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Thu May 30 09:59:25 2013 -0400
PR c++/57404
* cp-lang.c (cp_classify_
> * Check against cxx11 dialect, not cxx0x.
Let's talk about this tomorrow. I'm not quite sure how to do this.
> * Any particular reason to use classes with operator() for the
> parseers and the combinators? GCC can inline indirect calls to
> functions with internal linkage. That sh
Andrew Sutton writes:
| This is a kind of large patch. It provides support for parsing
| constraints, the new concept declaration specifier (with some
| semantics implemented), and the infrastructure for creating and
| comparing constraints.
See comments below. Patch OK when the comments are ad
On 05/30/2013 12:08 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ if (!host_integerp (arg1, 0))
+ break;
+
+ n = TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1);
+ result = gimple_expand_buil
The attached patch optimizes
__result_f = __builtin_powif (-1.0e+0, k);
to
powi_cond_4 = k_1(D) & 1;
powi_5 = powi_cond_4 ? -1.0e+0 : 1.0e+0;
I did an all-language (all,ada,go,objc++) bootstrap and regtest on
x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk?
Additionally, I would like to thank Th
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Cary Coutant wrote:
>> That's weird cause in dwarf2.exp:
>>
>> # If a testcase doesn't have special options, use these.
>> global DEFAULT_CFLAGS
>> if ![info exists DEFAULT_CFLAGS] then {
>> set DEFAULT_CFLAGS " -ansi -pedantic-errors -gdwarf-2"
>> }
>>
>> But
> That's weird cause in dwarf2.exp:
>
> # If a testcase doesn't have special options, use these.
> global DEFAULT_CFLAGS
> if ![info exists DEFAULT_CFLAGS] then {
> set DEFAULT_CFLAGS " -ansi -pedantic-errors -gdwarf-2"
> }
>
> But anyway, shall I add the -gdwarf-2 option back to discriminator.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All
>
> Second patch enables several Silvermont uarch features which improve
> performance of the new processor (based on experiments on real SLM
> hardware):
> 1. If using a 2-source or 3-source LEA for non-destructive destination
> pur
Hi all,
the attached patch is a follow-up to my recent patch for PR57217. It
splits up the function 'compare_type_rank' into two separate ones
('compare_type' and 'compare_rank'), in order to generate more precise
error messages. In particular it now prints the values of the
differing types or ran
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Rainer Orth writes:
>
>> And why do you add -gdwarf-2 in dg-options? AFAICS all tests in
>> gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2 are built with -gdwarf-2 anyway.
>
> Do they? Not here.
>
> Executing on host: /daten/aranym/g
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 00:15 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> And I can't get it to fail. I also can't find any place where the
> label and jump table might get separated. I was expecting some trouble
> with cross-jumping but it seems that it takes care of updating the
> label reference, and skip_in
Hi All
Second patch enables several Silvermont uarch features which improve
performance of the new processor (based on experiments on real SLM
hardware):
1. If using a 2-source or 3-source LEA for non-destructive destination
purposes, or due to wanting ability to use SCALE, the use of LEA is
prefe
On 2013-05-30 04:32, Ian Bolton wrote:
On 05/20/2013 11:55 AM, Ian Bolton wrote:
> >I improved this patch during the work I did on the recent insv_imm
>patch
> >(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01007.html).
>
>Thanks, you cleaned up almost everything on which I would have
>commen
On 2013-05-30 06:25, Kaushik Phatak wrote:
Ping.
Can I commit this with below changes?
Thanks,
Kaushik
-Original Message-
From: Kaushik Phatak
Sent: 20 May 2013 20:17
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: 'Richard Henderson'; DJ Delorie (d...@redhat.com)
Subject: RE: [PATCH:RL78] Add new insn
Hi All!
Second patch enables several Silvermont uarch features which improve
performance of the new processor (based on experiments on real SLM
hardware):
1. If using a 2-source or 3-source LEA for non-destructive destination
purposes, or due to wanting ability to use SCALE, the use of LEA is
> >>> The target_cpu_canonical substitution has been added in commit
> >>> 369e542b3ad1c0acfa9bfaeb72b338d8db5ba2ef (2009-02-27, r144463,
> >>> schwab) but unused ever since, thus removed.
> >>>
> >>> I'll now be testing for x86 GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd; further
> >>> testing appreciated.
> > For th
Ping.
Can I commit this with below changes?
Thanks,
Kaushik
-Original Message-
From: Kaushik Phatak
Sent: 20 May 2013 20:17
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: 'Richard Henderson'; DJ Delorie (d...@redhat.com)
Subject: RE: [PATCH:RL78] Add new insn for mulqi3 and mulhi3
Hi Richard,
Thanks f
By using logic functions we can convert logical algorithm into simple
algorithm without logical trees. This converts logical operation to
algebraic manipulation or math equation. This article is posted to
viXra pre print archive link http://vixra.org/abs/1305.0080 Therefore
we can make efficient pr
> On 05/20/2013 11:55 AM, Ian Bolton wrote:
> > I improved this patch during the work I did on the recent insv_imm
> patch
> > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01007.html).
>
> Thanks, you cleaned up almost everything on which I would have
> commented
> with the previous patch revisio
Honza,
This caused/exposed pr57467.
TIA
Dominique
Small update of the patch. Changes:
* There was a problem finalizing "var(:)%comp", which lead to an ICE.
Thanks to Dominique pointed out. See "expr->rank =" code added in
gfc_add_finalizer_call. I added the full test case from PR37336 (dg-do
compile: finalize_14.f90) to test for this.
* I
Hi all,
I have just committed as obvious a small ICE-on-invalid fix:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199445
Cheers,
Janus
On 29/05/13 13:55, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
This patch re-organizes the implementation of aarch64_classify_symbol in
preparation for add tiny absolute memory model support.
Regressed aarch64-none-elf, applied.
/Marcus
2013-05-29 Chris Schlumberger-Socha
Marcus Shawcroft
* con
> This is OK for mainline.
Hi. Checked into GCC trunk: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-05/msg00965.html
Thanks, K
***
> *** 0
> --- 1,23
> + /* { dg-do compile } */
> + /* { dg-require-effective-target vect_int } */
> + /* { dg-additional-options "-fvect-cost-model" } */
The test fails on ia64. The slp dump contains this:
/usr/local/gcc/gcc-20130530/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/
bootstrapped / regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu
build / regtested for i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf
Also, Andreas Schwab reported in the PR that he has successfully
tested this patch on m68k.
2013-05-29 Joern Rennecke
PR rtl-optimization/57439
* postreload.c (move2add_valid_value_
On 17 May 2013 22:22, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 05/16/13 07:27, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
>>
>> On 15 May 2013 06:31, Ramana Radhakrishnan
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry this had dropped off my list of patches to review somehow but
>>> anyway here's a first cut review.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at
Rainer Orth writes:
> And why do you add -gdwarf-2 in dg-options? AFAICS all tests in
> gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2 are built with -gdwarf-2 anyway.
Do they? Not here.
Executing on host: /daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130530/Build/gcc/xgcc
-B/daten/aranym/gcc/gcc-20130530/Build/gcc/
/daten/aranym/g
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh
wrote:
> We want this to be backported to GCC48 branch.
> Please approve.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Uros Bizjak [mailto:ubiz...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 6:22 PM
> To: Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh
> Cc: gcc-patche
A rather obvious patch - see PR for the quote from the standard. Thanks
goes to Bill Long for finding and reporting the issue.
Committed as Rev. 199437 after build+regtesting on x86-64-gnu-linux.
Tobias
2013-05-30 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/57458
* interface.c (compare_parameter): Update C1
Il 30/05/2013 09:33, Eric Botcazou ha scritto:
>> I don't think this fixes it. The problem is that the second eabi
>> > conditional overrides the first (the one for Android).
> Then let's fix the second eabi or swap them, but the first one must stay.
Yes, got it. Swapping them looks like the rig
> I don't think this fixes it. The problem is that the second eabi
> conditional overrides the first (the one for Android).
Then let's fix the second eabi or swap them, but the first one must stay.
--
Eric Botcazou
Il 30/05/2013 09:21, Eric Botcazou ha scritto:
>> However, it seems that the first androideabi snippet was dead code.
>> Can you delete it in a follow-up?
>
> No, it's not dead code, just broken at the moment, now fixed by:
>
>
> 2013-05-30 Eric Botcazou
>
> * gcc-interface/Makefile.in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 29/05/2013 23:36, Thomas Schwinge ha scritto:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 16:21:38 +0200, Paolo Bonzini
> wrote:
>> Il 29/05/2013 12:50, Thomas Schwinge ha scritto:
> How about we use something like the following [...] patch?
> In essenc
> However, it seems that the first androideabi snippet was dead code.
> Can you delete it in a follow-up?
No, it's not dead code, just broken at the moment, now fixed by:
2013-05-30 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/Makefile.in (arm% androideabi): Robustify.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: gcc
> And I can't get it to fail. I also can't find any place where the
> label and jump table might get separated. I was expecting some trouble
> with cross-jumping but it seems that it takes care of updating the
> label reference, and skip_insns_after_block already expects the label
> and table to be
70 matches
Mail list logo
