Re: calloc = malloc + memset

Hi On 28/feb/2014, at 23:48, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote: Hello, this is a stage 1 patch, and I'll ping it then, but if you have comments now... Passes bootstrap+testsuite on x86_64-linux-gnu. 2014-02-28 Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr PR tree-optimization/57742

Re: [PATCH GCC]Allow cfgcleanup to remove forwarder loop preheaders and latches

Hi H.J, Sorry that I will be out of office next week, and don't have chance to reproduce it until back. BTW, does x32 refer to x86 32 bit? Thanks, bin On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:23 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 9:42 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri,

[SH, committed] Fix PR 60071

Hi, I've just committed the attached patch that fixes PR 60071 as rev 208242. Originally tested by Kaz: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2014-02/msg01866.html Tested the new test case with: make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=compile.exp=pr60071.c --target_board=sh-sim

C++ PATCH for c++/58845 (ICE with vector )

There is some uncertainty in the PR discussion about what semantics vector should have, so this patch just avoids the ICE for now. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk and 4.8. commit cbf13b08495010d24a784170f76684e5109bd92b Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com Date: Fri Feb 28

Re: RFA: ipa-devirt PATCH for c++/58678 (devirt causes KDE build failure)

On 03/01/2014 03:52 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: a hidden function. We don't do that for user-defined virtual functions because the user controls whether or not they are defined in the header, and we don't devirtualize if no definition is available, but implicitly-declared functions are different

Optimize n?rotate(x,n):x

Hello, again, a stage 1 patch that I will ping then, but early comments are welcome. PR 59100 was asking to transform n?rotate(x,n):x to rotate(x,n) (because it can be hard to write a strictly valid rotate in plain C). The operation is really: (x != neutral) ? x op y : y where neutral is

[RFC] Do not consider volatile asms as optimization barriers #1

There seems to be a sufficiently large consensus that volatile asms should not be treated as full optimization barriers by the compiler. This patch is a first step towards implementing this conclusion and aims only at addressing the code quality regressions introduced by

Re: calloc = malloc + memset

On Sat, 1 Mar 2014, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi On 28/feb/2014, at 23:48, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote: Hello, this is a stage 1 patch, and I'll ping it then, but if you have comments now... Passes bootstrap+testsuite on x86_64-linux-gnu. 2014-02-28 Marc Glisse

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR51976 - [F2003] Support deferred-length character components of derived types (allocatable string length)

Hi Mikael, hi all, 2014-02-22 16:38 GMT+01:00 Mikael Morin mikael.mo...@sfr.fr: Le 19/02/2014 16:51, Janus Weil a écrit : The patch was not applying cleanly any more, so here is a re-diffed version for current trunk. It works nicely on the included test case as well as the one provided by

Re: [RFC] Do not consider volatile asms as optimization barriers #1

Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com writes: There seems to be a sufficiently large consensus that volatile asms should not be treated as full optimization barriers by the compiler. This patch is a first step towards implementing this conclusion and aims only at addressing the code

[Bug target/60369] [PATCH] [TIC6X] new compiler intrinsics

Hi all, this is to notify about the patch I've submitted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2014-02/msg02863.html Cheers, Wojtek

Re: RFA: ipa-devirt PATCH for c++/58678 (devirt causes KDE build failure)

On 03/01/2014 03:52 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: a hidden function. We don't do that for user-defined virtual functions because the user controls whether or not they are defined in the header, and we don't devirtualize if no definition is available, but implicitly-declared functions are different

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 58610

... in fact, we can also imagine the below clean-up, for another DECL_DELETED_FN use and likewise for DECL_DECLARED_CONSTEXPR_P (which immediately applies STRIP_TEMPLATE to its argument) uses. Or for Stage 1, maybe? Thanks, Paolo. // 2014-03-01 Paolo Carlini

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 60314 (ICE with decltype(auto))

Hi, On 02/28/2014 04:50 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: OK, thanks. Applied. I have just noticed (sorry) that get_AT_ref (thus get_AT) isn't trivial at all, thus I propose to apply the below. Is it Ok with you? Thanks, Paolo. // 2014-03-01 Paolo Carlini

Re: [PATCH i386 14/8] [AVX-512] Fix exp2 and sqrt tests.

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Uroš, On 28 Feb 13:55, Uros Bizjak wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, This is relatively obvious patch which eliminates comparision of inifinities

RE: [PATCH v4] PR middle-end/60281

Hi Lin, On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 19:14:11, lin zuojian wrote: 于 2014年02月28日 15:58, lin zuojian 写道: Hi Bernd, I agree you with the mode problem. And I have not change the stack alignment.What I change is the virtual register base's alignment. I tried your patch on this test case: gcc -O2

[PATCH] Fix PR c++/60377.

PR c++/60377 * parser.c (cp_parser_parameter_declaration_clause): Unwind generic function scope on parse error in function parameter list. PR c++/60377 * g++.dg/cpp1y/pr60377.C: New testcase. --- gcc/cp/parser.c | 7 ++-

C++ PATCH for c++/60379 (bogus error with loop in template)

We shouldn't complain if a loop condition isn't a valid constant expression; it isn't supposed to be. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 5266ff07b6077df5d7bf6d5748856a43e48ad6ee Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com Date: Sat Mar 1 14:22:02 2014 -0500 PR c++/60379

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 58610

OK. Jason

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/60377.

OK. Jason

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 60314 (ICE with decltype(auto))

OK. Jason

[patch, libgfortran] PR60148 Strings in NAMELIST do not honor DELIM= in open statement

Hi all, The attached patch fixes this by actually implementing it. I cleaned up some of the code by getting rid of the tmp_delim variables and adding a mode to write_character which is used to ignore delimiters when writing out variable names and other namelist parts. I will prepare a test

[Committed, fortran] PR 60341 invalid union access on string comparison optimization

Hello, I have just regression tested and committed a patch fixing PR 60341 by adding two expression type checks before union accesses (it's the same as the one of the PR). I plan to backport tomorrow (4.8 and 4.7). Mikael Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/str_comp_optimize_1.f90

[PATCH] [lto/55113] Fix use of -fshort-double with -flto for powerpc

This patch fixes lto/55113 for powerpc. Combining -fshort-double with -flto is now working fine. I attach patch and testcase (unsure if testcase is in the right place). Tested with target powerpc-abispe. 2014-03-01 Paulo Matos pa...@matos-sorge.com * c-family/c.opt: Add LTO FE

[C++ Patch] PR 50025 - [DR 1288] C++0x initialization syntax doesn't work for class members of reference type

Built and tested on x86-64-linux. This is just a test case. 2014-03-01 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net PR c++/50025 * g++.dg/cpp0x/pr50025.C: New. Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/pr50025.C === ---

[PATCH v2] Fix PR c++/25940

Hi, The following patch fixes two issues: the first issue is PR c++/25940 and the second is related to PR c++/13699. The first issue is that the C++ frontend fails to reject duplicate definitions of functions declared to have C language linkage. This results in the compiler emitting ASM that

Re: [PATCH v2] Fix PR c++/25940

On Sat, 1 Mar 2014, Patrick Palka wrote: + error_at (input_location, + redefinition of %q+#D with C language linkage, + x); + inform (input_location, + %q+#D

Re: [PATCH v2] Fix PR c++/25940

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote: On Sat, 1 Mar 2014, Patrick Palka wrote: + error_at (input_location, + redefinition of %q+#D with C language linkage, + x); +

Re: [PATCH v4] PR middle-end/60281

Hi Bernd, set_mem_align is not working like magic. set_mem_align just set the alignment of a memory rtx.And You must aware that you do so because you are sure this rtx IS aligned like this. For arm machines, the base the virtual registers are aligned to 8 bytes.You can't just set_mem_align to

Re: [PATCH v4] PR middle-end/60281

Hi Bernd, You may send a patch too.Your idea will be more clear. -- Regards lin zuojian On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 10:24:52AM +0800, lin zuojian wrote: Hi Bernd, set_mem_align is not working like magic. set_mem_align just set the alignment of a memory rtx.And You must aware that you do so

Why my mail is not achived

Hi, my mail is not achived by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/. What's happening? -- Regards lin zuojian

Re: Why my mail is not achived

Hi, I forgot now is Mar.I thought it's Feb.Sorry. -- Regards lin zuojian On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 10:57:15AM +0800, lin zuojian wrote: Hi, my mail is not achived by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/. What's happening? -- Regards lin zuojian

Re: Why my mail is not achived

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:57 PM, lin zuojian manjian2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, my mail is not achived by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/. What's happening? That's last month's archive.

Re: Why my mail is not achived

Yeah, I have realized that. On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 10:01:41PM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote: On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:57 PM, lin zuojian manjian2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, my mail is not achived by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/. What's happening? That's last month's

Re: [Fortran] RFC / RFA patch for using build_predict_expr instead of builtin_expect / PR 58721

Pre-remark: I currently get Stage 2/Stage 3 miscompares. As this is unlikely to be caused by my patch, it properly means that Honza's patch bitrotted even though it still applies. Dear all, attached is an updated patch set for this PR. Background: gfortran uses internally __builtin_expect.