Re: rs6000 stack_tie mishap again

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 01:38:26PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > The description and > references to prior SPE prologue and epilogue changes do not confirm a > wider problem. There's a good chance this affects ABI_V4 large stack frames too. If restoring regs inline we'll be using r11 as a base,

Re: rs6000 stack_tie mishap again

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 05:04:39PM +0100, Olivier Hainque wrote: > The reason why 894 is not accounted in the base ref computation is because it > is part of the epilogue sequence, and init_alias_analysis has: > > /* Walk the insns adding values to the new_reg_base_value array. */ >

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/62212 (ICE during mangling of array type)

OK. Jason

[PATCH] Fix PR c++/62212 (ICE during mangling of array type)

When mangling an ARRAY_TYPE whose element type is a typedef variant and whose domain is a type-dependent expression, we get an ICE when canonicalize_for_substitution() tries to create a canonical version of this ARRAY_TYPE with its element type being stripped of typedefs. During this

Re: [PATCH 7/7] ira.c validate_equiv_mem

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 01:03:18AM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 03/21/2016 02:43 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > > > >+enum valid_equiv { valid_none, valid_combine, valid_reload }; > >+ > > Might be worth documenting that each step represents a superset of the > previous one. Fixed. > >+ ret =

[PATCH, applied] PR 70381, fix -mfloat128 setting

This patch undoes a change that I made that I did not intend to install in the trunk. On October 29th, 2015 I commited a major patch to enable the IEEE 128-bit floating point support (subversion id 229545). I didn't realize I had set OPTION_MASK_FLOAT128 in the ISA_2_6_MASKS_SERVER macro (which

Re: [PATCH] 69517 - [5/6 regression] SEGV on a VLA with excess initializer elements

Thanks for the comments. 2) It hardwires a rather arbitrarily restrictive limit of 64 KB on the size of the biggest C++ VLA. (This could stand to be improved and made more intelligent, and perhaps integrated with stack checking via -fstack-limit, after the GCC 6 release.) The

Re: [PATCH] c++/67376 Comparison with pointer to past-the-end, of array fails inside constant expression

On 03/22/2016 04:01 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 03/22/2016 12:52 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 03/21/2016 06:09 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 03/21/2016 11:54 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: Both b0 and b1 are invalid and should be diagnosed, but only b1 is. b1 isn't because because by the time we see its

Re: Also test -O0 for OpenACC C, C++ offloading test cases

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:23:43AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > As discussed in > > (and similar to what we're already doing for Fortran, and similar to what > recently got committed to

Re: Also test -O0 for OpenACC C, C++ offloading test cases

On 03/23/2016 07:47 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Want me to re-word that? :-| I thought it would be obvious from looking at the test case code; will not be a problem in practice. It's because of constructs used in the test cases, like the following, for example: if

[committed] Fix up OpenMP taskloop C++ handling (PR c++/70376)

Hi! As the testcase shows, taskloop needs similar handling to task - we need to find implicitly firstprivate variables and synthetize their copy ctors and dtors. 2016-03-23 Jakub Jelinek PR c++/70376 * cp-gimplify.c (genericize_omp_for_stmt): Don't walk

Re: [C++ PATCH] Diagnose constexpr overflow (PR c++/70323)

For GCC 7 we should do constexpr evaluation on the unfolded function, but for GCC 6 this is OK. Jason

C++ PATCH for c++/70344 (ICE with recursive constexpr)

cp_fold tries to fold calls to constexpr functions. When we are inside a constexpr function at the time and see a call to the same function, this caused trouble because we hadn't adjusted the parameter types yet. Fixed by handling this special case of calling a constexpr function that isn't

Re: [PATCH] 69517 - [5/6 regression] SEGV on a VLA with excess initializer elements

On 03/06/2016 08:38 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: There are a few additional points to note about the patch: 1) It restores the std::bad_array_length exception from N3639, even though the class isn't specified by the C++ standard. At first I thought that introducing a different (private)

Re: [PR69315] enable finish_function to recurse for constexpr functions

OK. Jason

Re: C++ PATCH to add -Wignored-attributes (PR c++/69884)

OK. Jason

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70347 (default member initializer not picked up by union)

OK. Jason

Re: rs6000 stack_tie mishap again

First, SPE has not been maintained and little participation from Freescale. I would rather deprecate all SPE support. SPE ABI is broken by design. I find the approach very heavy-handed. If you want to enable the target hook for SPE *only*, that's fine with me. The description and references

[committed, testsuite] Add missing initializations in oacc testcases

Hi, I've run: - the goacc.exp testcases, and - the target-libgomp oacc testcases with -Wuninitialized, and found a few missing initalizations. Fixed and committed as attached. Thanks, - Tom Add missing initializations in oacc testcases 2016-03-23 Tom de Vries *

C++ PATCH to add -Wignored-attributes (PR c++/69884)

This PR is a request to add a way how to suppress the warning about ignored attributes. We concluded that -Wattributes isn't the right warning for this case, so I went ahead with Richi's suggestion to add -Wignored-attributes. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk? 2016-03-23

[PATCH] Fix PR c++/70347 (default member initializer not picked up by union)

When performing aggregate initialization on a union we fail to take into account the union's NSDMI (if it has one). This patch teaches process_init_constructor_union to consider NSDMIs. Does this look OK to commit after bootstrap + regtest? gcc/cp/ChangeLog: PR c++/70347 *

Re: [AArch64] Emit division using the Newton series

On 03/17/16 15:09, Evandro Menezes wrote: This patch implements FP division by an approximation using the Newton series. With this patch, DF division is sped up by over 100% and SF division, zilch, both on A57 and on M1. gcc/ * config/aarch64/aarch64-tuning-flags.def

Re: [AArch64] Emit division using the Newton series

On 03/17/16 15:09, Evandro Menezes wrote: This patch implements FP division by an approximation using the Newton series. With this patch, DF division is sped up by over 100% and SF division, zilch, both on A57 and on M1. gcc/ * config/aarch64/aarch64-tuning-flags.def

rs6000 stack_tie mishap again

Hello, This is a proposal to address what I think has been a long-standing, very nasty latent code generation problem, which just manifested in-house on a proprietary testcase. This is intricate, so long email ... Visible misbehavior The visible effect is a powerpc-eabispe

Re: [PR69315] enable finish_function to recurse for constexpr functions

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:57:36PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 05:28:10PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > Jakub, you added defer_mark_used_calls for BZ 37189, do you think it's still > > needed? The testcase passes without it now. > > That's a question. Digging through

Re: [PATCH PR69042/01]Add IV candidate for use with constant offset stripped in base.

On 03/23/2016 09:29 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: I think the patch is ok and eventually we need to revisit the outer loop handling with this as an excuse. Yes, currently GCC doesn't handle loop nest at all. Will revisit this part in coming stage1. Patch applied as revision 234429. So given there's

Re: [PATCH PR69042/01]Add IV candidate for use with constant offset stripped in base.

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Bin.Cheng

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR70372

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Wed, 23 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > I am testing the following obvious patch to fix an ICE in reassoc. > > > > Bootstrap / regtest on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu running. > > > > Richard. > > > > 2016-03-23 Richard Biener

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR70372

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: I am testing the following obvious patch to fix an ICE in reassoc. Bootstrap / regtest on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu running. Richard. 2016-03-23 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/70372 * tree-ssa-reassoc.c

Re: Fix 69650, bogus line numbers from libcpp

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 03/23/2016 01:41 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> Btw, the issue in the PR is also fixed with a simple >> >> Index: libcpp/line-map.c >> === >> ---

Re: [PATCH PR69042/01]Add IV candidate for use with constant offset stripped in base.

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Richard Biener >>>

[PATCH] Fix PR70372

I am testing the following obvious patch to fix an ICE in reassoc. Bootstrap / regtest on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu running. Richard. 2016-03-23 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/70372 * tree-ssa-reassoc.c (eliminate_plus_minus_pair): Use

Re: Patches to fix GCC’s C++ exception handling on NetBSD/VAX

In article , Jake Hamby wrote: Hi, Thanks a lot for your patch. I applied it to our gcc-5 in the tree. Unfortunately gcc-5 seems that it was never tested to even compile. I fixed the simple compilation issue, but it fails to

Re: [PATCH PR69042/01]Add IV candidate for use with constant offset stripped in base.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Bin

Re: C PATCH for c/70297 (crash with duplicate typedefs and -g)

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 09:57:54PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On March 21, 2016 6:55:28 PM GMT+01:00, Marek Polacek > wrote: > >This PR points out to a GC problem: when we freed a duplicate typedef, > >we were > >leaving its type in the variants list, with its TYPE_NAME

Re: [PR69315] enable finish_function to recurse for constexpr functions

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 05:28:10PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > Jakub, you added defer_mark_used_calls for BZ 37189, do you think it's still > needed? The testcase passes without it now. That's a question. Digging through history, I found: 1) r149750 aka gimplification unit-at-a-time 2)

[PATCH] Limit alias walking by speculative devirt

This reduces the compile-time for the testcase from PR12392 from ~50s to ~35s, dropping the alias-stmt walking time from 40% to around 8%. Currently (even when -fno-devirtualize-speculatively - heh) when looking for a must-def that specifies the dynamic type of an object we invoke a virtual call

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70332 (ICE due to aggregate initialization of NSDMI)

OK. Jason

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 03:55:01PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: >> > No, the change is OK (standard_sse_constant_p does all the checks), >> > but nowadays we could write this part as: >> > >> > --cut here-- >> > diff --git

Re: [RFA][PATCH][tree-optimization/64058] Add new coalescing tie breaker heuristic V2

On 03/23/2016 03:14 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote: This patch contains two parts. First is a bit of raw infrastructure in bitmap.c. That change factors out the code to count the bits set in a given BITMAP_WORD and uses that new

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70332 (ICE due to aggregate initialization of NSDMI)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2016, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 03/22/2016 07:12 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > > On 03/22/2016 05:35 PM, Patrick Palka

Re: [RFC][ARM,AArch64] Adding crypto Advsimd intrinsics tests

On 8 March 2016 at 16:37, Christophe Lyon wrote: > To illustrate what I mean, in fact we already have similar cases: > > On 7 March 2016 at 10:12, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> Hi, >> >> While preparing the cleanup of neon-testgen.ml, I'm

Re: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 08:05:19AM -0500, James Norris wrote: > Jakub, > > On 03/23/2016 05:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >Otherwise LGTM, but please repost it with all the testcase changes you want > >to make. > > Attached is the updated patch with the castings added, as well as > the updated

Re: Fix 69650, bogus line numbers from libcpp

On 03/23/2016 01:41 PM, Richard Biener wrote: Btw, the issue in the PR is also fixed with a simple Index: libcpp/line-map.c === --- libcpp/line-map.c (revision 234415) +++ libcpp/line-map.c (working copy) @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@

Re: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

Jakub, On 03/23/2016 05:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Otherwise LGTM, but please repost it with all the testcase changes you want to make. Attached is the updated patch with the castings added, as well as the updated tests. Thanks! Jim == 2016-03-23 James Norris

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 03:55:01PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > No, the change is OK (standard_sse_constant_p does all the checks), > > but nowadays we could write this part as: > > > > --cut here-- > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c > > index 1639704..59154c3

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70332 (ICE due to aggregate initialization of NSDMI)

On 03/22/2016 07:12 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 03/22/2016 05:35 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: + if (cp_unevaluated_operand == 0 Why

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On 23 Mar 13:28, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Kirill Yukhin > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > `vpcmpeqd' insn is only available in AVX2, however > > [1] added check for AVX instead. Looks like a typo. > > > > Patch in the bottom fixes that. > > > >

Re: Fix 69650, bogus line numbers from libcpp

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 03/21/2016 09:15 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 14:20 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>> >>> On 03/11/2016 11:09 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > + cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR, >

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

>On 23 Mar 13:13, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 03:06:22PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > On 23 Mar 12:55, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:47:54PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > > > > This code is only executed if standard_sse_constant_p returns 2, which >

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 03:06:22PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > On 23 Mar 12:55, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:47:54PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > > > This code is only executed if standard_sse_constant_p returns 2, which > > > > is for 16-byte vectors and all ones for

Re: [PATCH][ARM][RFC] PR target/65578 Fix gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/builtin-apply-4.c for single-precision fpus

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi all, > > In this wrong-code PR the builtin-apply-4.c test fails with -flto but only > when targeting an fpu > with only single-precision capabilities. > > bar is a function returing a double. For non-LTO

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On 23 Mar 12:55, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:47:54PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > > This code is only executed if standard_sse_constant_p returns 2, which > > > is for 16-byte vectors and all ones for TARGET_SSE2, and for > > > 32-byte vectors for TARGET_AVX2. > > > Thus,

[testsuite, sparc, gcc-5] Skip gcc.target/sparc/20151219-1.c in 64-bit mode

gcc.target/sparc/20151219-1.c currently FAILs on the gcc-5 branch only for the 64-bit case: FAIL: gcc.target/sparc/20151219-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/sparc/20151219-1.c scan-assembler-not stx\\t% Fixed by the following backport. Tested with the appropriate runtest invocation

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:47:54PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > This code is only executed if standard_sse_constant_p returns 2, which > > is for 16-byte vectors and all ones for TARGET_SSE2, and for > > 32-byte vectors for TARGET_AVX2. > > Thus, IMNSHO the patch is wrong, even for plain -mavx

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On 23 Mar 12:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:28:03PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > Hello, > > > > `vpcmpeqd' insn is only available in AVX2, however > > [1] added check for AVX instead. Looks like a typo. > > > > Patch in the bottom fixes that. > > > > Bootstrapped,

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 02:28:03PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Hello, > > `vpcmpeqd' insn is only available in AVX2, however > [1] added check for AVX instead. Looks like a typo. > > Patch in the bottom fixes that. > > Bootstrapped, regtest still run. > Is it ok for main trunk if pass? ?? I

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On 23 Mar 04:36, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Kirill Yukhin > wrote: > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c > > index 1639704..7f5db75 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c > > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c > > @@ -10859,7

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Hello, > > `vpcmpeqd' insn is only available in AVX2, however > [1] added check for AVX instead. Looks like a typo. > > Patch in the bottom fixes that. > > Bootstrapped, regtest still run. > Is it ok for main trunk

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Split out armv7ve effective target check

On 23/03/16 11:09, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 23/03/16 10:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> >> On 16/03/16 15:54, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Kyrill Tkachov >>> wrote: Hi all, I'm seeing the fails: FAIL:

[PATCH, CHKP, Solaris, PR target/69917, committed] Respect transparent alias chains of assembler names

Hi, This patch fixes gcc.target/i386/chkp-hidden-def.c test failure on Solaris. Failure happens because some Solaris emit code ignores transparent alias chains for assembler names. The patch was tested and approved by Rainer Orth (see [1] for more details). Applied to trunk. [1]

[PATCH, i386, AVX] Fix typo in i386.c/standard_sse_constant_opcode ().

Hello, `vpcmpeqd' insn is only available in AVX2, however [1] added check for AVX instead. Looks like a typo. Patch in the bottom fixes that. Bootstrapped, regtest still run. Is it ok for main trunk if pass? gcc/ * config/i386/i386.c (standard_sse_constant_opcode): Emit

RE: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

Jakub, > The ChangeLog format is thus company names > aren't listed explicitly, but your email is @sgi.com, so it will be there. I understand the format, thanks. Regards, Daichi Fukuoka -Original Message- From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 23,

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Split out armv7ve effective target check

On 23/03/16 10:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 16/03/16 15:54, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, I'm seeing the fails: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_2.c scan-assembler-times ldrd\tr[0-9]+, r[0-9]+,

Re: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:31:33AM +, Fukuoka Daichi wrote: > > Yeah, the oacc-mem.c is a two liner, we don't need copyright assignment for > > that, so please mention Daichi-san's name + mail address, and PR > > libgpmp/69414 in the ChangeLog entry. > > If possible, could you add " SGI

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Split out armv7ve effective target check

On 16/03/16 15:54, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, I'm seeing the fails: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_2.c scan-assembler-times ldrd\tr[0-9]+, r[0-9]+, \\[r[0-9]+\\] 1 FAIL:

RE: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

Hi, > Yeah, the oacc-mem.c is a two liner, we don't need copyright assignment for > that, so please mention Daichi-san's name + mail address, and PR > libgpmp/69414 in the ChangeLog entry. If possible, could you add " SGI Japan, Ltd." before/after my name? Because I am belonging to the

Re: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:35:30AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:50:38 -0600, James Norris > wrote: > > The attached patch fixes a defect reported with gcc 5.2 > > (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69414). > > It is also the

Re: [PATCH][ARM] PR driver/70132: Avoid double fclose in driver-arm.c

On 14/03/16 12:04, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 03/11/2016 04:32 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: PR driver/70132 * config/arm/driver-arm.c (host_detect_local_cpu): Set file pointer to NULL after closing file. Doesn't match the patch. Either variant is fine but please use the right

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Add deprecation warning on pre-v4t architecture revisions

Ping. Thanks, Kyrill On 07/03/16 15:40, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Ping. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-03/msg00046.html Thanks, Kyrill On 01/03/16 16:17, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, For GCC 6 we want to deprecate architecture revisions prior to ARMv4T. This patch implements this by

Re: [PATCH] Fix 69845

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> Note that always when I find bugs in extract_muldiv and try >> to decipher what it does I think we need to rip that out, >> replacing it with some simple

Re: [PATCH] Fix 69845

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > Note that always when I find bugs in extract_muldiv and try > to decipher what it does I think we need to rip that out, > replacing it with some simple patterns and leaving the rest > to passes like reassoc. It's simply a beast

Re: [RFA][PATCH][tree-optimization/64058] Add new coalescing tie breaker heuristic V2

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > > This patch contains two parts. First is a bit of raw infrastructure in > bitmap.c. That change factors out the code to count the bits set in a given > BITMAP_WORD and uses that new function from bitmap_count_bits. > > It also

Re: [PATCH] Fix 69845

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > In PR68142 you added a check for overflow + __INT_MIN__. > I can't figure out why the check for __INT_MIN__, except > that it seems specific to the test case you examined. > > And indeed, this test case shows how things

Re: [PATCH] Fix *vector_shift_pattern (PR tree-optimization/70354)

On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As the testcase shows, the C/C++ FEs narrow the shift counters from whatever > type they had originally to unsigned int (previously signed int). > Then the vect-patterns code, to be able to use vector by vector shifts > attempts to narrow or

Re: [PATCH] Adjust PR70251 fix

On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On March 22, 2016 4:55:13 PM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse > > wrote: > > > On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > This adjusts the PR70251 fix as discussed in

Re: [gomp4] Fix handling of subarrays with update directive

Hi! On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:50:38 -0600, James Norris wrote: > The attached patch fixes a defect reported with gcc 5.2 > (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69414). > It is also the case, the issue is present in the gomp4 > branch. The patch also adds

[RFA][PATCH][tree-optimization/64058] Add new coalescing tie breaker heuristic V2

This patch contains two parts. First is a bit of raw infrastructure in bitmap.c. That change factors out the code to count the bits set in a given BITMAP_WORD and uses that new function from bitmap_count_bits. It also introduces bitmap_count_unique_bits which counts the unique bits set

Re: [PATCH] Slightly improve TARGET_STV splitters (PR target/70321)

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As the PR mentions, DImode AND/IOR/XOR patterns often result in too ugly > code, regression from when the patterns weren't there (before STV has been > added). This patch attempts to improve it a little bit by

Re: [PATCH V3]PR other/70268: map one directory name (old) to another (new) in __FILE__

Ping, is that OK? Any suggestions? //Hongxu On 03/18/2016 01:16 PM, Hongxu Jia wrote: Changed in V3: - Rebase to latest master (efc86c4c627b82364f118a29b5d9d58cad8b8c76) - Fix bad formatting (missing space before '('). - Use of @code{} around literal source code text. //Hongxu

Re: Also test -O0 for OpenACC C, C++ offloading test cases

Hi! On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 23:52:11 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 03/22/2016 11:23 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > --- libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/routine-w-1.c > > +++ libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/routine-w-1.c > > @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ > > -/* {