Since armv8.1 added, we need to improve --with-arch recognition sed
pattern to catch the new "." in the architecture base name.
OK for trunk?
2015-10-14 Jiong Wang
gcc/
* config.gcc: Recognize "." in architecture base name for AArch64.
diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc
Jiong Wang writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
> index 5818663..215ad9a 100644
> --- a/gcc/config.gcc
> +++ b/gcc/config.gcc
> @@ -3544,7 +3544,7 @@ case "${target}" in
>
> eval "val=\$with_$which"
>
On 10/13/2015 04:47 PM, Arkadiusz Drabczyk wrote:
* gcc/doc/extend.texi: documentation says that functions declared
`inline' would not be integrated if they are called before they are
defined or if they are recursive. Both of these statements is now
false as shown in examples on Bugzilla.
It
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Yulia Koval wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes the issue:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
>
> gcc/config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal) Disable
> 80387 mask if lakemont target is set.
>
> diff --git
On 10/14/2015 03:19 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 10/14/2015 02:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
The problem here is we don't know what address space the *0 is going to
hit,
right?
Correct, not before we do the walk of stmt
Hi!
I've created gomp-4_5-branch in svn, where further OpenMP 4.5 development
will happen.
The following patch which I've committed there (and after a while plan to
merge to trunk together with other smaller changes) adds support for
monotonic and nonmonotonic schedule modifiers. The older
On 10/14/2015 09:43 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I think he asked for trivial forward threads though due to repeated
tests.
I hacked FRE to do this (I think), but maybe some trivial cleanup
opportunities
are still left here. Honza?
Well, unthreaded jumps quite confuse profile prediction and create
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:32:08PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > My main question about this series is - how generally useful do you
> > expect it to be? I know of some different projects that would like
> > bi-endian capability, but it looks like this series implements something
> > that is a
On 14 Oct 15:06, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>
> Will send an updated version after testing.
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
>
Here is an updated patch version.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2015-10-14 Ilya Enkovich
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_get_new_vect_var): Support
On 14 Oct 13:50, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2015-10-14 11:49 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Ilya Enkovich
> > wrote:
> >> I don't understand what you mean. vect_get_vec_def_for_operand has two
> >> changes made.
>
[ was: Re: [PATCH, 3/5] Handle original loop tree in
expand_omp_for_generic ]
On 13/10/15 23:48, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Tom!
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:56:29 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
>Handle original loop tree in expand_omp_for_generic
>
>2015-09-12 Tom de
Here's the latest version of the tools for a sub directory in contrib.
I've handled all the feedback, except I have not fully commented the
python code in the tools, nor followed any particular coding
convention... Documentation has been handled, and I've added some
additional comments to
On 10/13/2015 02:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 10/14/2015 02:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
The problem here is we don't know what address space the *0 is going
to hit,
right?
Correct, not before we do the walk of stmt to see what's present.
So the address space information isn't part of the
> >>> I think he asked for trivial forward threads though due to repeated
> >>> tests.
> >>> I hacked FRE to do this (I think), but maybe some trivial cleanup
> >>> opportunities
> >>> are still left here. Honza?
Well, unthreaded jumps quite confuse profile prediction and create profiles
that we
TED==+
| Pro 7.4.0w (20151014-60) (x86_64-suse-linux) GCC error: |
| tree check: expected class 'expression', have |
| 'exceptional' (ssa_name) in tree_operand_check, at tree.h:3431|
| Error detected around c37213k.adb:95:37
It's recompute_tree_invariant_for_addr_e
Hi,
This patch fixes the issue:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
gcc/config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal) Disable
80387 mask if lakemont target is set.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 4c25c9e..db722aa 100644
---
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:15 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Yulia Koval wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch fixes the issue:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67963
>>
>> gcc/config/i386/i386.c
On 10/14/2015 09:25 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
I haven't looked at the C++ changes, but I tend to think they mat may be
the language where this is the least useful. I expect it would be
pretty "trivial" to write some wrapper classes that use bswap in
operators so you could say things like
This patch fixes some fallout from my patch to move the sqrt and cbrt
folding rules to match.pd. The rules included canonicalisations like:
sqrt(sqrt(x))->pow(x,1/4)
which in the original code was only ever done at the generic level.
My patch meant that we'd do it whenever we tried to fold a
On 10/14/2015 02:28 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
If you're using one of the switches that checks for stack overflow at the
start of the function, you certainly don't want to do any such stores.
There is a protection area for -fstack-check (STACK_CHECK_PROTECT bytes) so
you can do stores just below
Evidently, the X - (X / Y) * Y -> X % Y pattern can't change the
signedness of X from signed to unsigned, otherwise we'd generate
wrong code. (But unsigned -> signed should be fine.)
Does anyone see a better fix than this?
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-10-14 Marek
On October 14, 2015 6:27:02 PM GMT+02:00, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Hi,
>this patch adds the CONSTRUCTOR case discussed while back. Only empty
>constructors are matched, as those are only appearing in gimple
>operand.
>I tested that during bootstrap about 7500 matches are for empty
By default, there is no visibility on builtin functions. When there is
explicitly declared visibility on the C library function which a builtin
function fall back on, we should honor the explicit visibility on the
the C library function.
There are 2 issues:
1. We never update visibility of the
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> ---
> gcc/c/
>
> PR middle-end/67220
> * c-decl.c (diagnose_mismatched_decls): Copy explicit visibility
> to builtin function.
>
> gcc/
>
> PR middle-end/67220
> * expr.c
On 10/08/2015 08:10 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
This patch by Richard allows for movmisalign optabs to be supported
in gimple-fold.c. This caused a bit of pain in the testsuite with strlenopt-8.c
in conjunction with the ARM support for movmisalign_optabs as the test
was coded up to do
> On 10/14/2015 10:27 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >Hi,
> >this patch adds the CONSTRUCTOR case discussed while back. Only empty
> >constructors are matched, as those are only appearing in gimple operand.
> >I tested that during bootstrap about 7500 matches are for empty ctors.
> >There are couple
tree-ssa-threadupdate.c keeps running total of the number of edges it
threads. Those totals are useful debugging tools and are also examined
by the testsuite.
While looking at the effects of using the FSM threader on
ssa-dom-thread-2?.c I noticed the counters weren't being updated
On 10/14/2015 11:24 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ /* For undocumented options that are aliases for other
+options that are documented, print the other option's
+help and name. */
+ help = cl_options
On October 14, 2015 8:27:31 PM GMT+02:00, Marek Polacek
wrote:
>Evidently, the X - (X / Y) * Y -> X % Y pattern can't change the
>signedness of X from signed to unsigned, otherwise we'd generate
>wrong code. (But unsigned -> signed should be fine.)
>
>Does anyone see a
On 14/10/15 10:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:20:06PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
This patch removes UBSan stubs from ASan and TSan code. We don't embed UBSan
to ASan and UBSan because that would lead to undefined references to C++
stuff when linking with -static-libasan.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> ---
>> gcc/c/
>>
>> PR middle-end/67220
>> * c-decl.c (diagnose_mismatched_decls): Copy explicit visibility
>>
ssa-dom-thread-2.c is actually 6 distinct tests crammed into a single
file. That's normally not a huge problem, but it can make tests hard to
write when we're scanning dumps.
This patch splits it into 6 distinct tests. ssa-dom-thread-2[a-f].c.
It also tightens the expected output slightly
On 10/13/2015 02:16 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
_Potentially_ so, yes. However, GCC is free to put the allocation into
an otherwise-unused part of the stack frame.
Well, I looked at code generation changes, and it usually seems to come
with an increase in stack frame size - sometimes causing
On 14-10-2015 04:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:54:33PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>> On 13/10/15 14:15, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>>> This is the raw merge itself. I'm bumping SONAME to libasan.so.3.
>>>
>>> -Maxim
>>
>> I have just noticed that I've misused autoconf
On 14 October 2015 at 19:21, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> Wait. As Jakub correctly pointed out in the other thread, there is no
> obvious reason why there could not be a single shadow offset value
> that would work for all 3 possible VMA settings. I suggest figuring
> this
Hi,
this patch adds VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR which is another code omitted in
operand_equal_p. During bootstrap there are about 1000 matches.
Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, OK?
Honza
* fold-const.c (operand_equal_p): Handle VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR.
Index: fold-const.c
Hi,
this patch adds the CONSTRUCTOR case discussed while back. Only empty
constructors are matched, as those are only appearing in gimple operand.
I tested that during bootstrap about 7500 matches are for empty ctors.
There are couple hundred for non-empty probably used on generic.
I've committed this to gomp4 branch. It removes some now unreachable code and
removes the now bogus description about OpenACC.
nathan
2015-10-14 Nathan Sidwell
* omp-low.c (lower_reduction_clauses): Correct comment, remove
unreachable code.
Index: gcc/omp-low.c
On 10/14/2015 10:27 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
this patch adds the CONSTRUCTOR case discussed while back. Only empty
constructors are matched, as those are only appearing in gimple operand.
I tested that during bootstrap about 7500 matches are for empty ctors.
There are couple hundred for
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Adhemerval Zanella
wrote:
>
>
> On 14-10-2015 04:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:54:33PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>>> On 13/10/15 14:15, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
This is the raw merge itself. I'm
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:17:46PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This is just reapplied patch for SPARC by David S. Miller. I was unable to
> test this, so could anyone help me here?
This is ok if all the other changes are approved. You don't need to list
my name in there, just list David's.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:16:23PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This patch introduces required compiler changes. Now, we don't version
> asan_init, we have a special __asan_version_mismatch_check_v[n] symbol for
> this.
For this, I just have to wonder what is the actual improvement over what
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:21:21PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This patch adjusts the fix for
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61771 to extract the last PC
> from the stack frame if no valid FP is available for ARM.
I guess this is ok once all other changes are acked.
>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:22:36PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This is the final patch. Force libsanitizer to use an old ABI for ubsan
> float cast data descriptors, because for some exprs (e.g. that type of
> tcc_declaration) we can't get the right location for now. I'm not sure about
> this,
Bootstrapped / tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2015-10-14 Richard Biener
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment):
Reset info at start.
(vect_analyze_group_access_1): Add debug print.
*
On 14/10/15 10:04, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
No, both the above changes are wrong. There is not a single int32_t
written, but could be many more, it is an array of 32-bit integers.
I'd say you just want to cast explicitly,
omp_get_place_proc_ids (*place_num, (int *) ids);
and
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This patch implements the copysign optimization for reassoc I promised
> I'd look into. I.e.,
>
> CST1 * copysign (CST2, y) -> copysign (CST1 * CST2, y) if CST1 > 0
> CST1 * copysign (CST2, y) -> -copysign (CST1 * CST2, y) if CST1 < 0
>
> After
On 30/09/15 20:23, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
On 09/30/2015 06:21 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 30/09/15 14:47, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 09/17/2015 11:15 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
ping 2.
this patch is needed for working visibility ("protected")
attribute for extern data on targets using
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:20:06PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This patch removes UBSan stubs from ASan and TSan code. We don't embed UBSan
> to ASan and UBSan because that would lead to undefined references to C++
> stuff when linking with -static-libasan. AFAIK, sanitizer developers use
>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:54:33PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> On 13/10/15 14:15, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> >This is the raw merge itself. I'm bumping SONAME to libasan.so.3.
> >
> >-Maxim
>
> I have just noticed that I've misused autoconf stuff (used wrong version).
> Here a fixed version of
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 10/14/2015 02:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem here is we don't know what address space the *0 is going to
>>> hit,
On 14/10/15 10:04, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:34:48AM +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>/home/EB/sebastian_h/archive/gcc-git/libgomp/fortran.c:28:0:
>/home/EB/sebastian_h/archive/gcc-git/libgomp/fortran.c:73:18: note: expected
>'int *' but argument is of type 'int32_t * {aka
> If you're using one of the switches that checks for stack overflow at the
> start of the function, you certainly don't want to do any such stores.
There is a protection area for -fstack-check (STACK_CHECK_PROTECT bytes) so
you can do stores just below the stack pointer as far as it's
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 10:15 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:25 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 15:36 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Sep 23,
On 10/14/2015 12:34 PM, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
On 14/10/15 10:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Do you plan to update the asan tests we have to reflect the changes in
upstream?
Hm, there aren't changes into instrumentation, so the only thing is new
interceptors. If it is desirable, I can migrate some
Hello,
I get now the following error:
libtool: compile: /scratch/git-build/b-gcc-git-arm-rtems4.12/./gcc/xgcc
-B/scratch/git-build/b-gcc-git-arm-rtems4.12/./gcc/ -nostdinc
-B/scratch/git-build/b-gcc-git-arm-rtems4.12/arm-rtems4.12/newlib/
-isystem
On 14/10/15 10:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:54:33PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
On 13/10/15 14:15, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
This is the raw merge itself. I'm bumping SONAME to libasan.so.3.
-Maxim
I have just noticed that I've misused autoconf stuff (used wrong
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:18:41PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> This is a reapplied Jakub's patch for disabling ODR violation detection.
> More details can be found here
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63888).
This is ok when all the other changes are acked.
> 2015-10-12
On 10/13/2015 02:16 PM, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
This patch introduces required compiler changes. Now, we don't version
asan_init, we have a special __asan_version_mismatch_check_v[n] symbol
for this.
Also, asan_stack_malloc_[n] doesn't take a local stack as a second
parameter anymore, so don't
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:34:48AM +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> /home/EB/sebastian_h/archive/gcc-git/libgomp/fortran.c:28:0:
> /home/EB/sebastian_h/archive/gcc-git/libgomp/fortran.c:73:18: note: expected
> 'int *' but argument is of type 'int32_t * {aka long int *}'
Ugh, wasn't aware that some
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2015-10-13 16:54 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch adds a special handling of boolean
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 10/14/2015 02:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> The problem here is we don't know what address space the *0 is going to
>> hit,
>> right?
>
>
> Correct, not before we do the walk of stmt to see what's present.
>
>> Isn't
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Oct 12, 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 14 October 2015 at 19:21, Evgenii Stepanov
> wrote:
>> Wait. As Jakub correctly pointed out in the other thread, there is no
>> obvious reason why there could not be a single shadow
On 14 October 2015 at 20:00, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Then until that happens I think we should disable asan and tsan for
> AARCH64 for GCC.
I can't comment on that, but we'll continue running the tests on our
side on both 39 and 42 VMA configurations, to make sure we don't
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 14 October 2015 at 20:00, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> Then until that happens I think we should disable asan and tsan for
>> AARCH64 for GCC.
>
> I can't comment on that, but we'll continue running
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Martin Sebor wrote:
> IMO, printing the aliased option's help text makes using the output
> easier for users who find the undocumented option first, in that
> they don't then have to go look for the one that does have
> documentation, so I left that part in place. If you or
On Oct 14, 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On Oct 13, 2015, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>>
>> > Note that this is PR middle-end/67912.
>>
>> Thanks. I added this piece of information to the ChangeLog entry, and
>> checked the patch in.
> Thanks, Alexandre. That
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Marek Polacek wrote:
Evidently, the X - (X / Y) * Y -> X % Y pattern can't change the
signedness of X from signed to unsigned, otherwise we'd generate
wrong code. (But unsigned -> signed should be fine.)
Does anyone see a better fix than this?
I was wondering about
On 10/14/2015 07:43 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Obviously some pessimization relative to current code is necessary to
fix some of the problems WRT thread safety and avoiding things like
introducing faults in code which did not previously fault.
Huh? This patch is purely an (attempt at) optimization,
Attached patch fixes PR 67967, where we emit REG_CFA_EXPRESSION,
attached to aligned SSE store. This is unnecessary, and confuses SEH
targets.
2015-10-14 Uros Bizjak
PR target/67967
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_emit_save_reg_using_mov): Do not add
Uros Bizjak writes:
> Fairly trivial patch that introduces no functional changes.
>
> * config/mips/mips.h (MIPS_STACK_ALIGN): Implement using
> ROUND_UP macro.
> * config/mips/mips.c (mips_setup_incoming_varargs): Use
> ROUND_DOWN to calculate off.
>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:36:43AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 10/13/2015 04:47 PM, Arkadiusz Drabczyk wrote:
> >* gcc/doc/extend.texi: documentation says that functions declared
> >`inline' would not be integrated if they are called before they are
> >defined or if they are recursive. Both of
On 10/14/2015 02:57 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Can you use the TMR_OFFSET macro rather than TREE_OPERAND (op0, 1)?
It also seems that you need a stronger check here.
Essentially you have to verify that
STEP * INDEX + INDEX2 + OFFSET == 0
Right?
No, it's MEM_REF, not TARGET_MEM_REF, see
On 10/14/2015 08:22 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I think you could trigger bogus CSE of dereferences of literal addresses
from different address-spaces.
Good catch. You're spot on with that.
r~
int test(void)
{
int __seg_fs *f = (int __seg_fs *)16;
int __seg_gs *g = (int __seg_gs *)16;
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Matthew Fortune
wrote:
> Uros Bizjak writes:
>> Fairly trivial patch that introduces no functional changes.
>>
>> * config/mips/mips.h (MIPS_STACK_ALIGN): Implement using
>> ROUND_UP macro.
>> *
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 22:19 +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 11:52 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> Thanks for the review! I've attached the changes to the documentation below.
>> Is this better?
>
> Yes, thanks!
Great, thanks! This is committed a revision 228827. I'm just
On 12 October 2015 at 11:58, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 07/10/15 00:59, charles.bay...@linaro.org wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm-builtins.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm-builtins.c
>
> ...
>>
>> case NEON_ARG_MEMORY:
>> /* Check if expand
> Can you use the TMR_OFFSET macro rather than TREE_OPERAND (op0, 1)?
>
> It also seems that you need a stronger check here.
>
> Essentially you have to verify that
> STEP * INDEX + INDEX2 + OFFSET == 0
>
> Right?
No, it's MEM_REF, not TARGET_MEM_REF, see build_fold_addr_expr_with_type_loc.
Bootstrap and make check for x86 passed. No new fails.
Please ignore an empty line added to omp-low.c in the patch, the
misprint will be removed prior to a commit.
Thanks,
Evgeny
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:35 AM, Evgeny Stupachenko wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a new version
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
+/* Fold (a * (1 << b)) into (a << b) */
+(simplify
+ (mult:c @0 (convert? (lshift integer_onep@1 @2)))
+ (if (! FLOAT_TYPE_P (type)
+&& tree_nop_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (@2)))
+ (lshift @0 (convert @2
You don't need/want to
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:51:44PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> Ok, got it. The first solution would require changes in libsanitizer because
> heuristic doesn't work for GCC, so perhaps new UBSan entry point should go
> upstream, right? Or this may be implemented as local patch for GCC?
No.
On 14/10/15 10:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:22:36PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
This is the final patch. Force libsanitizer to use an old ABI for ubsan
float cast data descriptors, because for some exprs (e.g. that type of
tcc_declaration) we can't get the right
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> +(simplify
> + (plus (convert? @0) (convert? (xdivamulminusa @0 @1)))
> + (if ((INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type) || VECTOR_INTEGER_TYPE_P (type))
> + && tree_nop_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> + (trunc_mod
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> One of the cases that was missing in the FSM support is threading when the
>> path is a single block. ie, a control statement's output can
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>>> +/* Fold (a * (1 << b)) into (a << b) */
>>> +(simplify
>>> + (mult:c @0 (convert? (lshift integer_onep@1 @2)))
>>> + (if (! FLOAT_TYPE_P (type)
>>> +&&
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
+/* Fold (a * (1 << b)) into (a << b) */
+(simplify
+ (mult:c @0 (convert? (lshift integer_onep@1 @2)))
+ (if (! FLOAT_TYPE_P
2015-10-14 11:49 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> I don't understand what you mean. vect_get_vec_def_for_operand has two
>> changes made.
>> 1. For boolean invariants use
2015-10-13 16:37 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch handles statements with boolean result in vectorization factor
>> computation. For comparison its operands type is used
> On October 14, 2015 6:27:02 PM GMT+02:00, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >Hi,
> >this patch adds the CONSTRUCTOR case discussed while back. Only empty
> >constructors are matched, as those are only appearing in gimple
> >operand.
> >I tested that during bootstrap about 7500 matches are
On 10/14/2015 03:42 PM, Arkadiusz Drabczyk wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:36:43AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 10/13/2015 04:47 PM, Arkadiusz Drabczyk wrote:
* gcc/doc/extend.texi: documentation says that functions declared
`inline' would not be integrated if they are called before they
On 10/09/2015 05:11 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:39:54 +0200, I wrote:
[...] cleanup; committed to
gomp-4_0-branch in r226072: [...]
OK for trunk?
I think all three patches here look OK.
Bernd
2015-10-13 16:45 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch supports comparison statements vectrization basing on introduced
>> optabs.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ilya
>> --
>> gcc/
>>
>>
Hi all,
This patch fixes the referenced PR by rewriting the vfp3_const_double_for_bits
function in arm.c
The function is supposed to accept positive CONST_DOUBLE rtxes whose value is
an exact power of 2
and whose log2 is between 1 and 32. That is values like 2.0, 4.0, 8.9, 16.0
etc...
The
Enable instruction fusion of dependent AESE; AESMC and AESD; AESIMC pairs. This
can give up to 2x
speedup on many AArch64 implementations. Also model the crypto instructions on
Cortex-A57 according
to the Optimization Guide.
Passes regression tests.
ChangeLog:
2015-10-14 Wilco Dijkstra
Dear Cesar,
>
> Is there any reason why only certain arrays have array descriptors? The
> arrays with descriptors don't have this problem. It's only the ones
> without descriptors that leak new internal variables that cause errors
> with default(none).
>
This is an obvious question to which
On 14/10/15 14:06, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:51:44PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
Ok, got it. The first solution would require changes in libsanitizer because
heuristic doesn't work for GCC, so perhaps new UBSan entry point should go
upstream, right? Or this may be
On 10/09/2015 05:14 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:47:41 +0200, I wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2015 11:43:20 +0200, I wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2015 10:20:14 -0400, John David Anglin
wrote:
FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-42.c
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 03:02:22PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> On 14/10/15 14:06, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:51:44PM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> >>Ok, got it. The first solution would require changes in libsanitizer because
> >>heuristic doesn't work for GCC, so
Hello,
On 07 Oct 11:09, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/05/2015 07:24 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> >
> >>To enable vectorization of loops w/ calls to math functions it is reasonable
> >>to enable parsing of attribute vector for functions unconditionally and
>
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo