It doesn't really make sense for __GXX_ABI_VERSION to be 9 under
-fabi-version=0; that tells the user about what flag was given, but not
what ABI is actually active. So let's change flag_abi_version to
something more specific, which has the effect of making
__GXX_ABI_VERSION more useful.
On 02/12/2015 08:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I tried the second patch. Results look good on Linux/x86-64.
Thanks. My results concurr. I went ahead and installed the patch as posted.
r~
2015-02-12 H.J. Lu
Richard Henderson
PR rtl/32219
* cgraphunit.c (cgraph_nod
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 02/12/2015 03:05 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> @@ -6830,9 +6830,15 @@ default_binds_local_p_2 (const_tree exp, bool shlib,
>> bool weak_dominate)
>>bool resolved_locally = false;
>>if (symtab_node *node = symtab_node::get (exp))
>>
Applied, thanks. I wrapped some lines that were over 80 characters long.
Jason
> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 6:16 AM
> To: Hale Wang; 'GCC Patches'; Richard Sandiford
> Subject: Re: Ping : [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the
insns
> if a volatile register is contained
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'cpplib' has been submitted
by the Vietnamese team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/cpplib/vi.po
(This file, 'cpplib-5.1-b20150
cpplib-5.1-b20150208.vi.po.gz
Description: Binary data
The Translation Project robot, in the
name of your translation coordinator.
> -Original Message-
> From: Petar Jovanovic [mailto:petar.jovano...@rt-rk.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 7:28 PM
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2][MIPS] fix CRT_CALL_STATIC_FUNCTION macro
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Moore, Catherine [mailto:catherine_mo...@mentor.com]
> Sen
-Original Message-
From: Moore, Catherine [mailto:catherine_mo...@mentor.com]
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 4:13 PM
To: Matthew Fortune; Petar Jovanovic; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; 'Maciej W.
Rozycki'
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2][MIPS] fix CRT_CALL_STATIC_FUNCTION macro
> Petar, would you ple
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 07:01:12PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:04:45AM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> >> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_epi
On 02/12/2015 03:05 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> @@ -6830,9 +6830,15 @@ default_binds_local_p_2 (const_tree exp, bool shlib,
> bool weak_dominate)
>bool resolved_locally = false;
>if (symtab_node *node = symtab_node::get (exp))
> {
> - /* When not building shared library and weak_dominat
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:04:45AM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_epilogue): Use addsi3_carry
>> > or adddi3_carry when restoring fra
Hi all,
would be nice to have nested namespace definitions in gcc. I'm not
sure if this if it's possible to merge stuff like this at this stage.
2015-2-13 Andrea Azzarone
PR c++/65047
* gcc/cp/cp-tree.h Declare maybe_warn_cpp1z.
* gcc/cp/error.c Define maybe_warn_cpp1z.
* gcc/cp/parser.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This patch tries to avoid emitting -Wformat-signedness warnings in cases
> where integer promotions are performed on unsigned values such as:
> unsigned short arg = N;
> printf ("%u\n", arg);
> here we can know that the promoted value of arg is in ra
On 02/12/15 06:02, Richard Biener wrote:
No strong opinion on separate pattern or integrating into existing pattern.
Yeah, I'd leave it as you did it for now. Btw, -ENOPATCH.
This version should address all your comments. A few notes.
When in GENERIC, the inner operands can be a fairly ar
Tested on visium-elf, applied on the mainline.
2015-02-12 Eric Botcazou
* config/visium/visium.opt (msv-mode): Add RejectNegative and Report.
(muser-mode): Likewise.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: config/visium/visium.opt
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:04 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 02/12/2015 10:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>if (DECL_VISIBILITY_SPECIFIED (exp)
>>> + && (resolved_locally
>>> + || !flag_pic
>>
>> Yes, this essentially goes back to your
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 02/12/2015 10:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>if (DECL_VISIBILITY_SPECIFIED (exp)
>> + && (resolved_locally
>> + || !flag_pic
>
> Yes, this essentially goes back to your original patch, which I claim still
> conflates issues.
>
On 02/12/15 15:15, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:54:21PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
"Hale Wang" writes:
Ping?
It's not a regression (or is it?), so it is not appropriate for stage4.
That's the big question, of course.
[ INSN can never be an asm, that is already
The test in write_mangled_name for a variable template failed to
consider the case of a local extern declaration, which can have template
info while not actually being a template instantiation.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 6f16507d6457d8a43fda62f1f78e9d2e3557f3de
Author
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:54:21PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> "Hale Wang" writes:
> > Ping?
It's not a regression (or is it?), so it is not appropriate for stage4.
> >> diff --git a/gcc/combine.c b/gcc/combine.c index 5c763b4..6901ac2 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/combine.c
> >> +++ b/gcc/combin
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:04:45AM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_epilogue): Use addsi3_carry
> > or adddi3_carry when restoring frame_reg_rtx from r0 after restvr.
>
> Okay.
Committed re
On 02/03/2015 06:29 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Represents the @code{fma}, @code{fmaf}, and @code{fmal} builtin
> -functions that do a combined multiply of @var{x} and @var{y} and then
> -adding to@var{z} without doing an intermediate rounding step.
> +functions, which compute @samp{@var{x} * @
On 02/12/2015 01:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This patch tweaks the pr47573.C testcase, so that it is run only on
> comdat_group target. It is true that comdat_group is stricter than
> comdat, but we don't have an effective-target for the latter and I'm not
> sure what exactly to test fo
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:38:55PM +, David Howells wrote:
> Here's a patch that inserts "%s", into a number of printf-format calls to
> avoid:
>
> error: format not a string literal and no format arguments
> [-Werror=format-security]
>
> and to avoid reads on uninitialised data s
On 02/12/2015 01:23 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Ok for trunk?
>
> 2015-02-12 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR sanitizer/65000
> * g++.dg/ubsan/pr65000.C: New test.
Yes, thanks.
I was still trying to generate a pure C++ testcase, without -fsanitize.
Ah well...
r~
Hi!
This patch tweaks the pr47573.C testcase, so that it is run only on
comdat_group target. It is true that comdat_group is stricter than
comdat, but we don't have an effective-target for the latter and I'm not
sure what exactly to test for.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux
Hi!
This patch adds testcase for the PR you've fixed. Bootstrapped/regtested on
x86_64-linux and i686-linux, additionally tested with your patch reverted,
where the testcase fails.
Ok for trunk?
2015-02-12 Jakub Jelinek
PR sanitizer/65000
* g++.dg/ubsan/pr65000.C: New test.
When we fixed PR54005, making sure that atomic_is_lock_free returns the same
value for all objects of a given type, we probably should have changed the
interface so that we would pass size and alignment rather than size and object
pointer.
Instead, we decided that passing null for the object point
This patch tries to avoid emitting -Wformat-signedness warnings in cases
where integer promotions are performed on unsigned values such as:
unsigned short arg = N;
printf ("%u\n", arg);
here we can know that the promoted value of arg is in range <0, USHRT_MAX>, or
printf ("%" PRIx8, (uint8_t)
cpplib-5.1-b20150208.de.po.gz
Description: Binary data
The Translation Project robot, in the
name of your translation coordinator.
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'cpplib' has been submitted
by the German team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/cpplib/de.po
(This file, 'cpplib-5.1-b20150208.
Not sure I would call it "easy" but I was able to reproduce the problem
and then get it to work with this, at least in my testcase:
f := func(a ...string) error {
switch t :=
mv.CallSlice([]reflect.Value{reflect.ValueOf(a)})[0].Interface().(type) {
Folks at Google reported to me that some packages they are building rely
on changes to an object persisting in the underlying storage after the
object is destroyed, and the more aggressive DSE in GCC 4.9 breaks this.
Such code has undefined behavior, but this seems like a reasonable
thing to h
ite/g++/../../xg++
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/gcc-5-20150212/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/tls-wrap4.C
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never -nostdinc++
-I/sw/src/fink.build/gcc50-5.0.0-1000/darwin_ob
On 02/12/2015 01:04 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 02/10/2015 02:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Of course I wonder why you need to separate handling of functions and
variables
The variables need to be handled earlier, else the call to
analy
On 02/12/2015 10:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>if (DECL_VISIBILITY_SPECIFIED (exp)
> + && (resolved_locally
> + || !flag_pic
Yes, this essentially goes back to your original patch, which I claim still
conflates issues.
In particular, I believe mentioning flag_pic here is a serious error.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> H.J.,
>Oddly I saw no regressions in the g++ test suite at -m32/-m64 on
> x86_64-apple-darwin14.
>Jack
They have
// { dg-require-effective-target tls }
Does x86_64-apple-darwin14 support TLS? If yes, what does the
generate
H.J.,
Oddly I saw no regressions in the g++ test suite at -m32/-m64 on
x86_64-apple-darwin14.
Jack
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:16 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 02/10/2015 01:19 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>> As an existing iss
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:16 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 02/10/2015 01:19 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>> As an existing issue, I'm not sure why "specified" visibility is any
>>> different
>>> from unspecified visibility. As far as I'm
On Feb 11, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 09:10 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Feb 9, 2015, at 7:11 AM, Alex Velenko wrote:
>>> The following patch makes atomic-op-consume.c XFAIL
>>>
>>> Is this patch ok?
>>
>> Ok.
>>
>> I’d shorten the comment above the xfai
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 02/10/2015 01:19 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> As an existing issue, I'm not sure why "specified" visibility is any
>> different
>> from unspecified visibility. As far as I'm aware, the "specified" bit simply
>> means that the dec
On 02/10/2015 02:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Of course I wonder why you need to separate handling of functions and variables
The variables need to be handled earlier, else the call to
analyze_functions() will remove some optimized glob
OK.
Jason
> From: mliska V
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:58:36 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix PR ipa/64693.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2015-02-12 Martin Liska
>
> PR ipa/64693
> * ipa-icf.c (sem_item_optimizer::execute): Call
> identify_address_sensitive_classes.
> (sem_item_optimizer::ident
On 02/12/15 06:02, Richard Biener wrote:
Yeah, I'd leave it as you did it for now. Btw, -ENOPATCH.
Because it needed to spin through another round of testing :-) I'll be
posting it after my morning meetings.
jeff
On 02/12/15 00:01, Bin.Cheng wrote:
Cool that we are trying to simplify type conversion using generic
match facility. I have thought about type promotion in match.pd too.
match.pd really feels like a meta-language which describes how to
combine gimple or generic statements.
For example, (u
Ping.
Richard Sandiford writes:
> The original reason for this was to fix the missing space before "@var{z}".
> "Do a combined multiply ... and then" didn't sound quite right though:
> "and then" implies a separate step and so feels like a contradiction
> of "combined".
>
> Tested with "make doc
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00232.html
btw, sorry if the diff looks hard to parse. Some patterns are deleted
and replaced with similar-looking ones, which makes the diffs look
weird. I've tried a few diff algorithms but this is the best I got.
Kyrill
On 04/02/15 12:12
"Hale Wang" writes:
> Ping?
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:58 AM
>> To: Hale Wang; 'Segher Boessenkool'
>> Cc: GCC Patches
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a
>> volatile r
This changes __attribute__((unused)) to __attribute__((__unused__)) in
three gthr-*.h headers. As Jakub pointed out at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64885#c7 there are still
lots of other problems in these headers, but they have been there for
years and can wait for stage 1. This fi
I lean toward #1.
Jason
OK.
Jason
Hi,
Here's a patch that inserts "%s", into a number of printf-format calls to
avoid:
error: format not a string literal and no format arguments
[-Werror=format-security]
and to avoid reads on uninitialised data should a string with one or more "%"
in it be processed.
David
---
On 8 February 2015 at 03:24, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 02:51:43PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
While trying to build the GCC 5 with GCC 5, I ran into an ICE
Hi!
I'd like to ping following patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00367.html
- PR55541 - P2 - C++ debug info fix
Thanks.
Jakub
Hi!
-Wformat-security shows a real problem, although it supposedly affects only
alpha-vms target (but the code is compiled in everywhere except for
ia64-vms).
dw2_asm_output_delta is printf like, so passing just comment to it
will lead to segfault, because the comment will usually be "%s" and the
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> Fixes -Os breakage showing up as 3 testsuite fails like the following,
> caused by add3 losing r0 as a valid source reg.
>
> insn does not satisfy its constraints:
> (insn 98 97 99 2 (set (reg:SI 11 11)
> (plus:SI (reg:SI 0 0)
>
Hi!
While name will not contain any % characters, because it is what
dwarf_attr_name returns and there aren't attribute names with % in them,
all other spots that call dw2_asm_output_data use "%s", name instead of
name, so I think we should do the same here.
Ok for trunk if testing succeeds?
201
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:20:24 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> So, what we can do is e.g. ignore the nested #pragma omp target* regions
> inside of #pragma omp target, or turn them into __builtin_trap ().
I like this idea to ignore them at compile-time, but how to be with declare
target functions?
Hi,
PR65002 is the second issue caused by SRA for functions wrongly marked as
read-only. Previous fix for PR64353 doesn't work for this case because SSA
update happens too late. Here is a patch to disable SRA for such functions to
avoid inconsistent SSA issues.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:15:42AM +, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 10 February 2015 at 16:06, James Greenhalgh
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As is already done for mips and hppa, we should XFAIL this test on
> > AArch64 as we don't currently use the store_by_pieces infrastructure.
> >
> > We m
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Previously, the computation of _1174 can be replaced by _629
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/11/15 03:56, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
>>> index 7f3816c..7a95029 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/ChangeLog
>>> +++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
>>> @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
>>> +2015-02-10 Jeff
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As PR59448 started promoting consume to acquire and as written by Torvald,
> that isn't going to change any time soon unless the standard is clarified,
> this patch adjusts the two PPC testcases for that.
>
> Ok for trunk?
>
> 2015-02
On 09/02/15 23:32, Jeff Law wrote:
On 02/03/15 20:03, Bin.Cheng wrote:
I looked into the test and can confirm the previous compilation is correct.
The cover letter of this patch said IRA mis-handled REQ_EQUIV before,
but in this case it is REG_EQUAL that is lost. The full dump (without
this pat
On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, James Bowman wrote:
> > > +@table @gcctabopt
> > > +
> > > +@item -mspace
> > > +@opindex mspace
> > > +Enable code-size optimizations.
> > > +Some of these optimizations incur a minor performance penalty.
> >
> > We already have -Os, so why is an architecture-specific option
Fixes -Os breakage showing up as 3 testsuite fails like the following,
caused by add3 losing r0 as a valid source reg.
insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 98 97 99 2 (set (reg:SI 11 11)
(plus:SI (reg:SI 0 0)
(const_int 80 [0x50])))
/src/gcc-current/gcc/testsuite/gcc.t
On 02/09/2015 11:49 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 02/09/2015 11:35 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> Just like libiberty.h. So that C++ programs, such as GDB when built
>>> as a C++ program, can use it.
>>
>> Why is not needed for GCC building with C
Hi there,
This patch intends to prevent gcc from putting volatile memory access into
IT block for target like cortex-m7.
gcc/ChangeLog:
2015-02-12 Terry Guo
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_tune_cortex_m7): New global variable.
* config/arm/arm.h (TARGET_NO_VOLATILE_CE): New macro.
Hello.
There's patch for aforementioned issue where ICF process a merge operation
for a pair of functions that pass a pointer to the second pair of functions
(these functions are also identical). Unfortunately, these addresses are
compared
for equality.
Patch can lto-boostrap on x86_64 and pch.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We pass the values after STRIP_NOPS to *ROTATE_EXPR build, which is
> undesirable, as the testcase shows, the operand could very well end up being
> a pointer rather than integer.
Ugh, indeed tree_nop_conversion_p allows conversion to/from poin
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:03:57PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/09/15 19:19, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> >>From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 9:57 AM
> >
> >>>+#ifdef SHORT_IMMEDIATES_SIGN_EXTEND
> >>>+/* If MODE has a precision lower than PREC and
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 08:43:46AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Similar problem to the recently fixed UBSAN_VPTR lowering,
> ubsan_expand_objsize_ifn sets *gsi to the first stmt in a new bb
> after splitting block after UBSAN_OBJECT_SIZE, which is the next stmt
> that should be processed,
Hi!
As PR59448 started promoting consume to acquire and as written by Torvald,
that isn't going to change any time soon unless the standard is clarified,
this patch adjusts the two PPC testcases for that.
Ok for trunk?
2015-02-12 Jakub Jelinek
PR testsuite/64930
* gcc.target/
75 matches
Mail list logo
