On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:07:03AM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> On 09 Oct 16:07, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > > > + /* By default linker does not discard .gnu.offload_lto_*
> > > > sections. */
> > > > + const char *linker_script = make_temp_file ("_linker_script.x");
> > > > + FILE *stre
When we see a reference to an outer const variable that might be usable
in a constant-expression, we wait until instantiation time to see. If
it turns out not to be usable, we need to do the same lambda magic that
we would have done in finish_id_expression.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applyin
On 10/09/2014 11:15 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I noticed today that given the actual C++11 the error messages we provide:
"constexpr constructor does not have empty body"
and:
"body of constexpr function ‘XXX’ not a return-statement"
are rather outdated and misleading. In principle we
>>
>> This will cause bzip2 performance to degrade 6%. I haven't had time to
>> triage the problem. Will investigate this later.
>
> Still I would preffer to make this by default
> flag_reorder_blocks_and_partition
> to false with auto_profile. We could do that incrementally, lets just drop
> thi
On Oct 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 10/09/2014 05:54 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> 2014-10-09 Uros Bizjak
>>>
>>>* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C: Variable templates not in yet.
>>>(dg-do): Use c++1y ta
On 10/09/2014 05:54 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
2014-10-09 Uros Bizjak
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C: Variable templates not in yet.
(dg-do): Use c++1y target.
Tested on x86_64. OK for branch?
So, I need Ed or Jason to review it…
Yes, plea
The Go language was tweaked slightly to permit the variable to be
omitted in a range clause, so that one can write "for range v" instead
of having to write "for _ = range v". This patch from Chris Manghane
implements this in gccgo. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. C
>> I'd suggest adding an alias for "-no-pie" (meaning "--no-pie") -- see
>> earlier in common.opt where "-pie" is declared as an alias for "pie",
>> and similarly for "-shared".
>
> Patch Updated.
OK for google/gcc-4_9 branch. Thanks!
-cary
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Cary Coutant wrote:
If adding a new option, you need to document it in invoke.texi.
>>>
>>> Patch updated.
>>
>> Is this alright for google/gcc-4_9?
>
> +no-pie
> +Driver RejectNegative Negative(pie)
> +Create a position dependent executable
>
> I'd suggest add
>>> If adding a new option, you need to document it in invoke.texi.
>>
>> Patch updated.
>
> Is this alright for google/gcc-4_9?
+no-pie
+Driver RejectNegative Negative(pie)
+Create a position dependent executable
I'd suggest adding an alias for "-no-pie" (meaning "--no-pie") -- see
earlier in co
> >> Index: gcc/bb-reorder.c
> >> ===
> >> --- gcc/bb-reorder.c (revision 210180)
> >> +++ gcc/bb-reorder.c (working copy)
> >> @@ -2663,7 +2663,7 @@ pass_partition_blocks::gate (function *fun)
> >> user defined section attribu
On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:54 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> When Jason added the new g++.dg/ipa/devirt-28a.C test along with his
> fix for PR c++/58678
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00838.html), this new
> test was failing in the ARM and AArch64 configuration I am testing.
> Is it OK
On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> 2014-10-09 Uros Bizjak
>
>* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C: Variable templates not in yet.
>(dg-do): Use c++1y target.
>
> Tested on x86_64. OK for branch?
So, I need Ed or Jason to review it…
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C
On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I'd like to kick off a discussion about moving the default standard
> for C from gnu89 to gnu11.
I endorse the change of default.
> The things I had to fix in the testsuite nicely reflect what we can expect
> in the real life:
A wiki page that
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
>> If adding a new option, you need to document it in invoke.texi.
>
> Patch updated.
Is this alright for google/gcc-4_9?
Sri
>
> Thanks
> Sri
>
>>
>> --
>> Joseph S. Myers
>> jos
On Oct 9, 2014, at 3:39 AM, FX wrote:
> Version 2 of the patch, now handling the darwin case (thanks Iain)
> OK to commit?
For the bits I can approve, Ok.
On 10/08/14 13:08, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds removal of user calls to chkp builtins which become useless
after instrumentation.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_remove_useless_builtins): New.
(chkp_execute): Remove useless calls to
I merged trunk revision 216040 to the gccgo branch.
Ian
Am 07.09.2014 um 03:48 schrieb Ed Smith-Rowland:
> Greetings,
>
> I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
>
> This adds front end and preprocessor tests for the language feature tests and
> __has_include.
>
> I am still working on the fifth and last in this series to add
> _
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:27:09PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> this patch fixes Alan's issue with IMPLICIT followed by ";". I am not
> sure whether using the _eos machinery is really needed ??? especially as
> "!" seem to be already handled.
>
> Additionally, I missed the inner "[...]" for
Hi all,
this patch fixes Alan's issue with IMPLICIT followed by ";". I am not
sure whether using the _eos machinery is really needed – especially as
"!" seem to be already handled.
Additionally, I missed the inner "[...]" for the new:
R563 implicit-stmt is IMPLICIT implicit-spec-list
On 09 Oct 16:07, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > > + /* By default linker does not discard .gnu.offload_lto_* sections.
> > > */
> > > + const char *linker_script = make_temp_file ("_linker_script.x");
> > > + FILE *stream = fopen (linker_script, "w");
> > > + if (!stream)
> > > + fata
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>
> The only points in that patch are that on one hand - as far as I
> know - the Abi does not guarantee that section symbols are either
> zero or not relocated, even if that may be the case in reality.
> And on the other hand, if that code is ev
On 10/08/14 13:10, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces functions to handle static pointers and static bounds.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (MAX_STMTS_IN_STATIC_CHKP_CTOR): New.
(chkp_ctor_stmt_list): New.
(chkp_register_var_initia
Hello!
2014-10-09 Uros Bizjak
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C: Variable templates not in yet.
(dg-do): Use c++1y target.
Tested on x86_64. OK for branch?
Uros.
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C
===
--- g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> A test case added to golang for the previous patch.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> 2014-09-05 Dominik Vogt
>
> * go.test/test/recover.go (test1): Test recover() from deferred
> recursive function.
Proposed for master testsuit
On 10/08/14 13:12, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds an assignment processing function which is used by lnliner for
newly generated stores.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_copy_bounds_for_assign): New.
* tree-chkp.h (chkp_copy_bounds_for_
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 04:15:23PM +0400, Ilya Tocar wrote:
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> @@ -21358,32 +21358,169 @@ ix86_expand_int_vcond (rtx operands[])
>return true;
> }
>
> +/* AVX512F does support 64-byte integer vector operations,
> + thus the longe
Now that we have is_trivially_copyable ...
Update the docs and fix a TODO in .
I asked Doug Gregor recently about the __is_location_invariant trait
that he used in our std::tr1::function and std::function
implementations and he confirmed that in C++11
std::is_trivially_copyable is a better tes
On 10/08/14 13:16, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces structures and manipulation functions used by simple
checker optimizations. Structures are used to hold checks information - type
of check and checked address in a polinomial form.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
push_template_decl handles checking that template parameter lists make
sense, but we were never calling it for a definition of a member class
of a class template. Fixed by calling it in cp_parser_class_head, where
previously we had only called it for redefinition of primary templates.
Tested
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Given that this will be a substantial work and considering the request
from Kirill, what do you think about separate development branch until
AVXn stuff is finished? This will give a couple of weeks and a
playground to finalize the approach for the conversi
On 10/08/14 13:19, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds removal of unnecessary intersections into checker optimizations.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_release_check_info): New.
(chkp_init_check_info): New.
(chkp_gather_checks_info):
T{} is expressed as a CONSTRUCTOR with TREE_HAS_CONSTRUCTOR set, so we
need to consider the type and not just assume that all CONSTRUCTORs have
init-list type.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 81e370f51099c049313b9f6f1d8910e2475fbbcf
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Wed Oct 8
In C++14 mode the compiler turns (x) into static_cast(x) in order to
prevent decltype(auto) from treating it as plain x. But that also
messes with the magic for treating a local variable as an rvalue in a
return statement. So we need to mark the obfuscation as coming from (x)
so we can undo i
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>> If this is accepted, I will gladly prepare patches removing the unused
>>> builtins and extending this to a few more operations (integer vectors in
>>> particular). If this is not the direction we want to go, I'd like to hear it
>>> clearly s
> This fixes fallout from r216010, which causes Firefox build failures.
> Just move the gcc_assert below the new if statement.
>
> Boostrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> Ok for trunk?
OK, thanks!
Honza
> Thanks.
>
> 2014-10-09 Markus Trippelsdorf
>
> * pa-polymorphic-
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Olivier Hainque wrote:
On Oct 9, 2014, at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
If this is accepted, I will gladly prepare patches removing the unused builtins
and extending this to a few more operations (integer vectors in particular). If
this is not the direction we want to go, I
On 10/08/14 13:22, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds removal of redundant (covered by other) checks into checker
optimization.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_compare_checks): New.
(chkp_remove_redundant_checks): New.
(chkp_opt_ex
On 10/08/14 13:24, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds a bounds lifetime reduction into checker optimization.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_reduce_bounds_lifetime): New.
(chkp_opt_execute): Run bounds lifetime reduction
algorithm.
LGTM.
Your description could be more detail, such as which tests on which target.
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Sterling Augustine
wrote:
> The enclosed patch for google 4.9 is a backport of r210828 from
> trunk.
>
> googleref:b/14623977
>
> The given tests now pass when run by hand, but timeou
On 10/08/14 13:21, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds a removal of checks known to always pass into checker
optimization.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (chkp_remove_check_if_pass): New.
(chkp_remove_constant_checks): New.
(chkp_opt_exe
Okwell, I see a path forward, somewhere there
however (bah), I can't push that subset of patches - I came back from a week's
holiday and misremembered - the AArch64 changes depend upon the introduction of
the _scal_optabs, not just the tree changes :( .
I'll try to post optab migration
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 08:39:40PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > I like it. And one could reasonably argue that now is the time to change
> > since that maximizes the time for folks to find broken code.
>
> Yep, this is definitely stage1 stuff. We still h
On 10/08/14 13:18, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces simple optimization of string function calls using
variants with no checks and/or bounds copy when possible.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2014-10-08 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-chkp.c (check_infos): New.
(chkp_get_nobnd_fndecl):
Hello Marc,
On Oct 9, 2014, at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> If this is accepted, I will gladly prepare patches removing the unused
> builtins and extending this to a few more operations (integer vectors in
> particular). If this is not the direction we want to go, I'd like to hear it
> clearl
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> It appeared I changed a semantics of BNDMK expand when replaced tree
> operations with rtl ones.
>
> Original code:
>
> + op1 = expand_normal (fold_build2 (PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (arg1),
> + arg1, inte
Hi Cesar!
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:57:22 -0700, Cesar Philippidis
wrote:
> On 10/08/2014 02:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:22:52 -0700, Cesar Philippidis
> > wrote:
> >> There is a reduction bug [...]
> >> This patch also includes a runtime test case. I won't apply it
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends movcc/vcond autogen.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/i386.c
> (ix86_expand_sse_movcc): Handle V64QI
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends autogeneration of SI-2-SF
> conversions.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/i386.c
> (ix86_expand_vect
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends vec_init-related routines/patterns.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/i386.c
> (ix86_expand_vector_in
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/i386.c
> (emit_reduc_half): Handle V64QI and V32HI mode.
> * config/i386/sse.md
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends pattern for reducation maxmin autogen.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_mode_iterat
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends VI mode iterator.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/i386.c
> (ix86_expand_vector_logical_operator): H
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > The patch works for me.
> > Tested with GCC v4.9 branch rev 216036 and GCC trunk rev 216027.
>
> Thanks for testing! Can you work with Maciej to find out why he's
> seeing different results?
Seeing Rohit got good results it has struck me that perha
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This obvious patch removes redundant iterator attribute
>
> Bootstrapped.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md (define_mode_attr avx2_avx512f): Remove.
OK.
Thanks,
Uros.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch further extends maxmin patterns.
You didn't update field ;)
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (defi
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch adds support for vpmulhrsw insn.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_insn "avx512bw_umulhrswv3
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends vpmullw, vpacksdw and pmaddwd
> insn patterns.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_c_e
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This tiny patch updates constraints in vec_dup insn
> pattern.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_insn
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch extends vpalignr insn patterns.
> It also introduces dedicated `masked' version of pattern
> w/o substing.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Kirill Yukhin
> wrote:
>> On 08 Oct 23:02, Petr Murzin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I have measured performance impact on Haswell platform according to this
>>> input:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This tiny patch extend mul insn pattern to support
> masking.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (define_expand
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 04:18 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/09/2014 09:49 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in o
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> This patch adds rest of vpack instruction patterns.
>
> Bootstrapped.
> gcc.target/i386.exp tests on top of patch-set show no regressions.
> under simulator.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
> gcc/
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (
Hello folks,
On 09 Oct 14:57, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> OK, let's go in the proposed way, more detailed:
>
> - we begin with +-*/ of float/double vectors. IMO, this would result
> in a relatively small and
On 08/10/14 18:27, charles.bay...@linaro.org wrote:
From: Charles Baylis
This patch replaces the inline assembler implementations of the
vld[234](q?)_lane_* intrinsics with new versions which exploit the new builtin
functions added in patch 1.
Tested (with the rest of the patch series) with ma
Hello,
This patch extends movcc/vcond autogen.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_sse_movcc): Handle V64QI and V32HI mode.
(ix86_expand_int_vcond): Ditto.
--
Thanks, K
dif
+(define_insn "vec_load_lanesoi_lane"
Best to prepend "aarch64_" the pattern name, IMHO, else it looks like a
standard pattern name(eg. vec_load_lanes) at first glance.
Otherwise, LGTM(but I can't approve it). Thanks for this patch.
Thanks,
Tejas.
+ [(set (match_operand:OI 0 "register_op
Hello,
This patch extends autogeneration of SI-2-SF
conversions.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_vector_convert_uns_vsivsf): Handle V16SI mode and
TARGET_AVX512VL.
--
Th
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 04:47:05PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> 2014-10-09 Markus Trippelsdorf
>
> * /g++.dg/ipa/polymorphic-call-1.C: New testcase.
Please drop the leading '/' when you commit this patch.
Marek
This fixes fallout from r216010, which causes Firefox build failures.
Just move the gcc_assert below the new if statement.
Boostrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks.
2014-10-09 Markus Trippelsdorf
* pa-polymorphic-call.c (check_stmt_for_type_change):
2014-10-09 15:52 GMT+02:00 Patrick Wollgast :
> On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
>> have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
>> already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't foun
On 10/09/2014 09:49 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the
parameter?
Is also called re
On 09/10/14 12:35, Christian Bruel wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>
> << snipped agreed stuf >>
>> 3) about inlining
>>I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
>> might want to switch mode only when changing a function'
It appeared I changed a semantics of BNDMK expand when replaced tree operations
with rtl ones.
Original code:
+ op1 = expand_normal (fold_build2 (PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (arg1),
+ arg1, integer_minus_one_node));
+ op1 = force_reg (Pmode, op1);
Modifi
.. a simple example in C++11 would be:
struct S
{
constexpr S() { { struct T { }; } }
};
Paolo.
On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
> have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
> already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't found you on the list.
>
> Regards,
> Kai
>
The paper
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the parameter?
Is also called recursively by check_constexpr_ctor_body_1 and wi
OK, thanks.
Jason
rohitarulraj wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Maciej W. Rozycki [mailto:ma...@codesourcery.com]
> > To: Ulrich Weigand
> > Cc: Dharmakan Rohit-B30502; Wienskoski Edmar-RA8797; David Edelsohn; gcc-
> > patc...@gcc.gnu.org; Alan Modra; Jakub Jelinek
> > Subject: Re: [RFC: Patch, PR 601
On 10/09/2014 08:45 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
What happened to the plans to stabilize the libstdc++ c++11 ABI? Is this still
a target for GCC 5?
Yes.
Jason
On 10/08/2014 01:30 PM, Fabien Chêne wrote:
2014-10-07 23:13 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill :
It seems to me that the problem is that lookup_and_check_tag is rejecting a
USING_DECL rather than returning it. What if we return the USING_DECL?
If the USING_DECL is returned, the code below will be rejec
On 10/09/2014 09:30 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ return typeid (__complex) != typeid (__complex double);
Don't we want this to be '=='?
I think it wants to check for _complex being __complex double, not not
being _complex int (other failure modes exist!)
Right, I was forgetting about retur
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the parameter?
Jason
On 10/09/14 09:25, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/09/2014 05:24 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
"ISO C++ forbids declaration of %qs with no type", name);
type = integer_type_node;
+ defaulted_int = 1;
I would think we want to handle this up in the existing defaulted_
OK, thanks.
Jason
On 10/09/2014 05:24 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
"ISO C++ forbids declaration of %qs with no type", name);
type = integer_type_node;
+ defaulted_int = 1;
I would think we want to handle this up in the existing defaulted_int block:
/* No type at all: default
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>
>>> Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
>>>
>>> (another part of the discussion is around
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g
Am 08.10.2014 um 09:16 schrieb Richard Biener:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I think it makes sense to do this (and I expect C++ will follow
> with defaulting to -std=c++11 once the ABI stuff has settled).
>
> Of course it would be nice to look at the actual fallout in
> a whole-dis
Hi,
After enabling ASan, TSan and UBSan testsuites for installed toolchain,
many tests started to fail. This is caused by wrong logic in {asan,
ubsan, tsan}_finish
functions. Here, restore_ld_library_path is called, that is wrong,
because it drops some env variables ( GCC_EXEC_PREFIX, LD_LIBRA
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another part of the discussion is around
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02288.html )
Most people who commented seem cautiou
On 25 September 2014 21:30, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:33:17AM -0700, Michael Collison wrote:
>> The problem is the "CONST_INT 0", not a large constant. This constant is
>> not accepted by the predicate, but is accepted by the constraint.
>
> Yes, bad choice of words, s
> -Original Message-
> From: Maciej W. Rozycki [mailto:ma...@codesourcery.com]
> To: Ulrich Weigand
> Cc: Dharmakan Rohit-B30502; Wienskoski Edmar-RA8797; David Edelsohn; gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org; Alan Modra; Jakub Jelinek
> Subject: Re: [RFC: Patch, PR 60102] [4.9/4.10 Regression] power
Hi,
I think this patch should be split in 2 parts:
V64QI related and non-V64QI related.
This part contains non-V64QI related changes.
Also I've noticed, that not all patterns using VI1_AVX2,
actually have AVX512 versions, so fixed bogus patterns.
On 06 Oct 16:10, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Oc
Hello,
This patch extends vec_init-related routines/patterns.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_vector_init_duplicate): Handle V64QI and V32HI modes,
update V8HI, V16QI, V3
On 10/09/2014 02:07 PM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
+#ifndef ACCEL_COMPILER
/* We need to check standard_exec_prefix/just_machine_suffix/specs
for any override of as, ld and libraries. */
specs_file = (char *) alloca (strlen (standard_exec_prefix)
+ strlen (just_mach
On 08 Oct 12:26, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 07:14:57PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > @@ -1296,6 +1297,9 @@ static const char *const standard_startfile_prefix_2
> > relative to the driver. */
> > static const char *const tooldir_base_prefix = TOOLDIR_BASE_PREFIX;
> >
> >
Hello,
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(emit_reduc_half): Handle V64QI and V32HI mode.
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator VI_AVX512BW): New.
(define_expand "re
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
