[Patch] Fix regex multiple consecutive quantifiers bug.

Regex like "a**" will throw an unexpected exception. Now fixed (but currently no optimizations on it). Booted and tested with -m64 and -m32 respectively. Thank you! -- Regards, Tim Shen commit ceffce7f974d3ed58ba217807ffd431147ce717f Author: tim Date: Sat Jan 18 23:35:09 2014 -0500 201

RE: [PATCH] _Cilk_for for C and C++

Hi Aldy, I have answered your questions below. But, I am attaching the patch with the response to Jason Merrill's email. I am not attaching them here to remove unnecessary duplication. I hope that's OK with you. If you would like it otherwise please let me know and I can send them to you

Fix compute_reloc_for_constant

Hi, while comparing LTO and non-LTO builds I noticed that with LTO we produce a lot more vtables in datal.rel.ro rather than data.rel.ro.local This is because of partitioning promoting more symbols global. For RTL we make section decisions based on SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_FLAG that is set based on decl_bi

Re: [C,C++] integer constants in attribute arguments

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Jason Merrill wrote: On 11/30/2013 05:41 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: for some reason one of the attributes can see a FUNCTION_DECL where others see an IDENTIFIER_NODE, I didn't try to understand why and just added that check to the code. Please do check. In the C front-end (

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR58007: unresolved fixup hell

Hello, Le 11/01/2014 22:48, Janus Weil a écrit : > Good, thanks for checking. As written before, the patch is ok for > trunk from my side. > I finally committed it as revision 206759 (with the second testcase and a bit more comments). > In fact your test case fails with all versions I tried (4.4

PATCH: PR target/59379: [4.9 Regression] gomp_init_num_threads is compiled into an infinite loop with --with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=slm

For LEA operation with SImode_address_operand, which zero-extends SImode to DImode, ix86_split_lea_for_addr turns (set (reg:DI) ...) into (set (reg:SI) ...) We need to do (set (reg:DI) (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI))) at the end. If the LEA operation is (set (reg:DI) (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI))) we

Re: PATCH: PRs bootstrap/59580/59583: Improve x86 --with-arch/--with-cpu= configure handling

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 3:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> Please get someone to review config.gcc changes. They are OK as far as >>> x86 rename is concerned, but I can't review functional changes. >> >> Hi Paolo, >> >> Can you review this config.g

[PATCH, i386]: Reorder some code in ix86_adjust_cost

Hello! No functional changes, just some trivial code reordering while looking in these areas. 2014-01-18 Uros Bizjak * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_adjust_cost): Reorder PROCESSOR_K8 and PROCESSOR_ATHLON to simplify code. Move "memory" calculation. 2014-01-18 Uros Bizjak * config

Re: Ping: [PATCH] Prevent crash when expand movstr fail when movstr pattern is defined

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:37:18AM +, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Review ping for this patch. IMO it almost counts as obviously correct > but just in case... > > Kito Cheng writes: > > expand_movstr is work fine when we don't define movstr pattern or > > always expand it successfully, however

Ping: [PATCH] Prevent crash when expand movstr fail when movstr pattern is defined

Review ping for this patch. IMO it almost counts as obviously correct but just in case... Kito Cheng writes: > expand_movstr is work fine when we don't define movstr pattern or > always expand it successfully, however it's will crash when if movstr > expand fail since expand_insn expect always e

Re: PATCH: PRs bootstrap/59580/59583: Improve x86 --with-arch/--with-cpu= configure handling

On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 3:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Please get someone to review config.gcc changes. They are OK as far as >> x86 rename is concerned, but I can't review functional changes. > > Hi Paolo, > > Can you review this config.gcc change? > >> >> > @@ -588,6 +588,22 @@ esac >> > # Common

Re: [PATCH] Fix crossing jumps in functions with forced_labels (PR rtl-optimization/57763)

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 09:31:00AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > 2014-01-17 Jakub Jelinek > > PR rtl-optimization/57763 > * bb-reorder.c (fix_crossing_unconditional_branches): Set JUMP_LABEL > on the new indirect jump_insn. Eric requested LABEL_NUSES increment and after looki

Re: Fix a dbr_schedule vs. delete_related_insns liveness bug

Jeff Law writes: >> gcc/ >> * jump.c (delete_related_insns): Keep (use (insn))s. >> * reorg.c (redundant_insn): Check for barriers too. > OK. Any chance you've got a testcase you can add to the suite? ISTM > it's potentially valuable given the plan to remove barriers and the > implic

Re: [PATCH] Avoid -Wunused-macros warning for #pragma GCC target added macros (PR target/58944)

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > It makes no sense to warn about unused macros that weren't defined > by the user, but the compiler instead injected them, the user > has no control on them. > For macros predefined at the beginning of the CU we don't get warnings > because t