Re: PATCH to fix bogus -Wimplicit-fallthrough warning (PR c++/77803)

On 2016.09.30 at 23:31 +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > This PR reports a bogus -Wimplicit-fallthrough warning on the attached test. > The problem is that last_stmt_in_scope should for GIMPLE_TRY, if the last > statement of the eval part can't fallthrough, return this statement and don't > warn. And

Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439

It looks like my email being sent from my company is being dropped, re sending via my gmail account. Doug From: Doug Gilmore Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 6:35 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Christophe Lyon Subject: Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE

Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439

It looks like my original message was dropped, resending -- Doug From: Doug Gilmore Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 6:35 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Christophe Lyon Subject: Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at

Fix PR tree-optimization/77808, ICE in duplicate_ssa_name_ptr_info, at tree-ssanames.c:630 starting with r240439

My commit r240439 didn't handle the situation where setting --param prefetch-latency=0 can cause the prefetch address to be the same as the original address. In this case, no copying of points-to information should be done. Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk? Doug

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wbool-operation (PR c/77490)

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:44:22PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > 2016-09-23 Marek Polacek > > PR c/77490 ... > * c-c++-common/Wbool-operation-1.c: New test. I've noticed this test fails on i686-linux and likely also on powerpc-linux. Fixed thusly, committed to

Re: Implement P0001R1 - C++17 removal of register storage class specifier

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 05:32:31PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:57:07PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > >> This is missing documentation of the new -Wregister option in invoke.texi. > > > > While

[Patch, Fortran] PR66643 Check for missing format

Committed r240686 M gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog M gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/write.f90 M gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/arrayio.f90 M gcc/fortran/ChangeLog M gcc/fortran/io.c as obvious and

Re: [PATCH] Fix bootstrap with --enable-languages=all,go

Jakub Jelinek writes: > 2016-09-30 Jakub Jelinek > > * configure.ac: Add target-libffi to target_libraries. > Readd libgcj target disablings, modified to only target-libffi. > Readd target addition of go to unsupported languages. > *

Re: [PATCH] Fix bootstrap with --enable-languages=all,go

Hi Eric, >> I haven't tried to readd the boehm-gc objc support that has also been >> disabled, don't know about anybody using that. > > I always configure with --enable-objc-gc. The only reason Apple > deprecated garbage collection for Objective C is because they replaced > it with Automated

Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of input.c

On Mon, 2016-09-26 at 14:30 +, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi, > > this started, because I saw get_next_line returns -1 on error, > instead > of false: PR 77699. > > But when I was there I also saw that read_line_num is using memmove > on > non-aliased src & dest, instead of memcpy. But then I

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

On 09/30/2016 01:40 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:08:19PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: On 09/30/2016 11:05 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: +permerror (input_location, "ISO C++11 only allows pointer " + "conversions for integer literals"); FWIW, I think it

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:31:33AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 03:52:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> >> On

Re: [Patch 5/11] Add -fpermitted-flt-eval-methods=[c11|ts-18661-3]

On Sep 30, 2016, at 10:34 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >> 2016-09-30 James Greenhalgh >> >> * gcc.dg/fpermitted-flt-eval-methods_1.c: New. >> * gcc.dg/fpermitted-flt-eval-methods_2.c: New. > OK.Are you going to need to do something for C++ (or

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 09/30/2016 12:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:42:20PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>> On 09/30/2016 11:45 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> See Tom Tromey's explanation why accepting too much

Re: Implement P0001R1 - C++17 removal of register storage class specifier

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:57:07PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: >> This is missing documentation of the new -Wregister option in invoke.texi. > > While I had it in my head when working on the patch, I forgot to do

PATCH to fix bogus -Wimplicit-fallthrough warning (PR c++/77803)

This PR reports a bogus -Wimplicit-fallthrough warning on the attached test. The problem is that last_stmt_in_scope should for GIMPLE_TRY, if the last statement of the eval part can't fallthrough, return this statement and don't warn. And the same should be true for FALLTHROUGH (). This patch

[v3 PATCH] PR libstdc++/77802

I do this with a rather heavy heart, but since gcc6 compiles boost 1.62, I'll rather have gcc7 do so as well, and I'll throw the tuple fix for lwg2729 to the wolves not because I want to, but because I have to. Tested on Linux-x64. 2016-10-01 Ville Voutilainen

[PATCH] FALLTHRU markers for sse.md and some cleanups

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 06:21:13PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:58:20PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:29:10PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > Not sure if I read this code correctly, but if we fall through from > > > V32HImode, and we have

[PATCH] Improve target pass registration

Hi! As discussed earlier on IRC, the current way of registering target specific passes has various issues: 1) for -da, the target specific dump files appear last, regardless on where exactly they appear in the pass queue, so one has to look up the sources or remember where the pass is

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:26:27AM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > I haven't gone over the patch in detail yet, but I wonder if we should > also accept /* Else, fall through. */ (to be found e.g. in aarch64-simd.md). Here is the patch split into a series of 3 patches (the later patches depend on

Re: [PATCH v4] PR48344: Fix unrecognizable insn error with -fstack-limit-register=r2

On Feb 11 2016, Kelvin Nilsen wrote: > * opts-global.c (handle_common_deferred_options): Introduce and > initialize two global variables to remember command-line options > specifying a stack-limiting register. > * opts.h: Add extern

Re: [PATCH] Fix bootstrap with --enable-languages=all,go

On 9/30/16, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:48:12PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 30/09/16 11:27, Marek Polacek wrote: >> > Can we move forward with this patch, then? >> >> I've been travelling for several weeks. However, I'm back at my desk >> now,

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:08:19PM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 09/30/2016 11:05 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > +permerror (input_location, "ISO C++11 only allows pointer " > > > + "conversions for integer literals"); > > > > FWIW, I think it would be clearer to either

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

On 09/30/2016 11:05 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: +permerror (input_location, "ISO C++11 only allows pointer " + "conversions for integer literals"); FWIW, I think it would be clearer to either mention the currently selected language version or leave it out completely rather

Re: [BUILDROBOT] dwarf2out_do_cfi_startproc(bool)’: may write a terminating nul past the end of the destination

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:07:22PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > When building for --target=sparc-leon-elf (using config-list.mk) with > a current GCC, I get this error message (cf. > http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/show_build_details.php?id=632317): > > g++ -fno-PIE -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC

[PATCH] Fix bootstrap with --enable-languages=all,go

Hi! On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:48:12PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 30/09/16 11:27, Marek Polacek wrote: > > Can we move forward with this patch, then? > > I've been travelling for several weeks. However, I'm back at my desk > now, so I can move this forward. I have all the approvals and >

[PATCH] Update email address

This patch updates my email address from sell...@imgtec.com to sell...@caviumnetworks.com Steve Ellcey sell...@caviumnetworks.com 2016-09-30 Steve Ellcey * MAINTAINERS: Update email address. Index: MAINTAINERS

[gomp4] simplify parition allocation logic

The code I wrote to determine partitions on auto loops was too complicated, making it hard for me to figure out the changes needed for tiling. I've committed this patch, which doesn't do such egregious bit twiddling. nathan 2016-09-30 Nathan Sidwell * omp-low.c

Re: [PATCH] libstdc++/77795 Only declare ::gets for C++98 and C++11

On 30/09/16 12:08 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: As noted in Bugzilla (and pointed out in LLVM's bugzilla by Richard Smith) we check for a ::gets() declaration with the default -std=gnu++14 mode, so for glibc we don't find it, and then we declare it ourselves in even though it's not meant to

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR tree-optimization/77654

On 30 September 2016 at 20:10, Doug Gilmore wrote: >> From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org] >> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:17 PM >> To: Matthew Fortune >> Cc: Doug Gilmore; Richard Biener; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; >> rgue...@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject:

RE: [PATCH] Fix PR tree-optimization/77654

> From: Christophe Lyon [christophe.l...@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:17 PM > To: Matthew Fortune > Cc: Doug Gilmore; Richard Biener; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; rgue...@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR tree-optimization/77654 > > On 23 September 2016 at 17:55,

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > > > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: > > > + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we

[PATCH 2/3] Temporary remove "at least 8 byte alignment" code from x86

This change drops forced alignment to 8 if requested alignment is higher than 8: before the patch, -falign-functions=9 was generating .p2align 4,,8 .p2align 3 which means: "align to 16 if the skip is 8 bytes or less; else align to 8". After this change, ".p2align 3" is not

[PATCH 3/3] Extend -falign-FOO=N to N[,M[,N2[,M2]]]

falign-functions=N is too simplistic. Ingo Molnar ran some tests and it seems that on latest x86 CPUs, 64-byte alignment of functions runs fastest (he tried many other possibilites): this way, after a call CPU can fetch a lot of insns in the first cacheline fill. However, developers are less

[PATCH 0/3] Extend -falign-FOO=N to N[,M[,N2[,M2]]] version 4

These patches are for this bug: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66240 "RFE: extend -falign-xyz syntax" The test program: int g(); int f(int i) { i *= 3; while (--i > 100) { L1:if (g()) goto L1; if (g()) goto L2; } return

[PATCH 1/3] Remove support for obsolete x86 -malign-foo options

2016-09-27 Denys Vlasenko * config/i386/i386-common.c (ix86_handle_option): Remove support for obsolete -malign-loops, -malign-jumps and -malign-functions options. * config/i386/i386.opt: Likewise. Index: gcc/common/config/i386/i386-common.c

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we are + in a standards compliant mode, and the

[C++/66443] deleted ctor and vbase construction

PR 66443 concerns C++14 DR1611. It is now permitted to use the base-ctor of an abstract class whos complete ctor is deleted because of a virtual base issue. Specifically, given class A { A (int); // no default ctor in C++14 }; class B : virtual A { virtual void Foo () = 0; // abstract

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: > + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we are > +in a standards compliant mode, and the implicit precision we > +provide can be

Re: [Patch 5/11] Add -fpermitted-flt-eval-methods=[c11|ts-18661-3]

On 09/30/2016 10:56 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This option is added to control which values of FLT_EVAL_METHOD the compiler is allowed to set. ISO/IEC TS 18661-3 defines new permissible values for FLT_EVAL_METHOD that indicate that operations and constants with a semantic type that is an

Re: [Patch 6/11] Migrate excess precision logic to use TARGET_EXCESS_PRECISION

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: >/* float.h needs to know this. */ > + /* We already have the option -fno-fp-int-builtin-inexact to ensure > + certain built-in functions follow TS 18661-1 semantics. It might be > + reasonable to have a new option to enable

Re: [Patch 8/11] Make _Float16 available if HFmode is available

On 09/30/2016 10:56 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, Now that we've worked on -fexcess-precision, the comment in targhooks.c no longer holds. We can now permit _Float16 on any target which provides HFmode and supports HFmode in libgcc. Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, and in series on

Re: [Patch 4/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for m68k

On 09/30/2016 11:01 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, This patch ports the logic from m68k's TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD to the new target hook TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. Patch tested by building an m68k-none-elf toolchain and running m68k.exp (without the ability to execute) with no regressions,

Re: [Patch 7/11] Delete TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD and poison it.

On 09/30/2016 10:56 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: Hi, We've removed all uses of TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD, so we can remove it and poison it. Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64 and AArch64. Tested on s390 and m68k to the best of my ability (no execute tests). OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/

Re: [patch][fix PR other/31566] @missing_file gives bad error message

On 09/29/2016 12:34 AM, Prasad Ghangal wrote: Hi all, I don't know if this is the right time to submit such patches. But this patch attempts to fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31566 I have successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu testcases: file: -Wall

Re: [PATCH] Make CHECKING_P a boolean flag again

On 09/25/2016 03:13 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: Hi! Currently CHECKING_P is not a boolean flag but a ternary option. However the _P in the name implies it is a boolean. That should be cleaned up again IMHO. So this patch splits CHECKING_P into CHECKING_P and a new flag ENABLE_EXTRA_CHECKING.

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

+ permerror (input_location, "ISO C++11 only allows pointer " + "conversions for integer literals"); FWIW, I think it would be clearer to either mention the currently selected language version or leave it out completely rather than hardcoding C++11. When

[Patch libgcc AArch64 10/11] Enable hfmode soft-float conversions and truncations

Hi, This patch enables the conversion functions we need for AArch64's _Float16 support. To do that we need to implement TARGET_SCALAR_MODE_SUPPORTED_P, so do that now. OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2016-09-30 James Greenhalgh * config/aarch64/aarch64-c.c

[Patch libgcc 9/11] Update soft-fp from glibc

Hi, This patch merges in the support added to glibc for HFmode conversions in this patch: commit 87ab10d6524fe4faabd7eb3eac5868165ecfb323 Author: James Greenhalgh Date: Wed Sep 21 21:02:54 2016 + [soft-fp] Add support for various

[Patch AArch64 11/11] Enable _Float16

Hi, Finally, this patch adds the back-end wiring to get AArch64 support for the _Float16 type working. Bootstrapped on AArch64 with no issues. OK? Thanks, James --- 2016-09-30 James Greenhalgh * config/aarch64/aarch64-c.c (aarch64_update_cpp_builtins):

[Patch libgcc 9/11] Update soft-fp from glibc

Hi, This patch merges in the support added to glibc for HFmode conversions in this patch: commit 87ab10d6524fe4faabd7eb3eac5868165ecfb323 Author: James Greenhalgh Date: Wed Sep 21 21:02:54 2016 + [soft-fp] Add support for various

[Patch 4/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for m68k

Hi, This patch ports the logic from m68k's TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD to the new target hook TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. Patch tested by building an m68k-none-elf toolchain and running m68k.exp (without the ability to execute) with no regressions, and manually inspecting the output assembly code

Re: [PATCH][v4] GIMPLE store merging pass

On September 30, 2016 4:43:10 PM GMT+02:00, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > >On 30/09/16 15:36, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi Richard, >> >> On 29/09/16 11:45, Richard Biener wrote: >>> + + /* In some cases get_inner_reference may return a +

[Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

Hi, This patch ports the logic from s390's TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD to the new target hook TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. Patch tested by building an s390-none-linux toolchain and running s390.exp (without the ability to execute) with no regressions, and manually inspecting the output assembly code

[Patch 2/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for i386

Hi, This patch ports the logic from i386's TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD to the new target hook TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. Bootstrapped and tested with no issues. OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2016-09-30 James Greenhalgh * config/i386/i386.c

Re: [PATCH][v4] GIMPLE store merging pass

Hi Richard, On 29/09/16 11:45, Richard Biener wrote: + gimple_seq seq = NULL; + unsigned int num_stmts = 0; + tree offset_type = get_type_for_merged_store (group); + tree last_vdef, new_vuse; + last_vdef = gimple_vdef (group->last_stmt); + new_vuse = gimple_vuse (group->last_stmt); +

[Patch 7/11] Delete TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD and poison it.

Hi, We've removed all uses of TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD, so we can remove it and poison it. Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64 and AArch64. Tested on s390 and m68k to the best of my ability (no execute tests). OK? Thanks, James --- gcc/ 2016-09-30 James Greenhalgh

[Patch 6/11] Migrate excess precision logic to use TARGET_EXCESS_PRECISION

Hi, This patch moves the logic for excess precision from using the TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD macro to the TARGET_EXCESS_PRECISION hook introduced earlier in the patch series. These logic changes follow Joseph's comments at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg00410.html Briefly; we have

[Patch 8/11] Make _Float16 available if HFmode is available

Hi, Now that we've worked on -fexcess-precision, the comment in targhooks.c no longer holds. We can now permit _Float16 on any target which provides HFmode and supports HFmode in libgcc. Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, and in series on AArch64. OK? Thanks, James --- 2016-09-30 James

[Patch 1/11] Add a new target hook for describing excess precision intentions

Hi, This patch introduces TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. This hook takes a tri-state argument, one of EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT, EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD, EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_FAST. Which relate to the implicit extra precision added by the target, the excess precision that should be

[Patch 5/11] Add -fpermitted-flt-eval-methods=[c11|ts-18661-3]

Hi, This option is added to control which values of FLT_EVAL_METHOD the compiler is allowed to set. ISO/IEC TS 18661-3 defines new permissible values for FLT_EVAL_METHOD that indicate that operations and constants with a semantic type that is an interchange or extended format should be

[Patch 0/11] Add support for _Float16 to AArch64

Hi, This patch set enables the _Float16 type specified in ISO/IEC TS 18661-3 for AArch64. To do this, we first need to update the excess precision logic to support possibly computing _Float16 values in 16-bit range and precision, and to set the FLT_EVAL_METHOD macro to "16" as appropriate. That

Re: Fix missing FALLTHRU comments

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 06:49:17PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > On Thu, 2016-09-29 18:01:46 +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > > My upcoming fix revealed more places that were missing a fall through > > marker. > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ppc64-linux, and

Re: Fwd: [PATCH] gcc: Fix sysroot relative paths for MinGW

On 09/29/2016 09:21 PM, Tadek Kijkowski wrote: Can I have plain-text mode, please, gmail? :-) Only because you're asking nicely... # Directory in which the compiler finds libraries etc. libsubdir = $(libdir)/gcc/$(real_target_noncanonical)/$(version)$(accel_dir_suffix) # Directory in

Re: Fix missing FALLTHRU comments

On Thu, 2016-09-29 18:01:46 +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > My upcoming fix revealed more places that were missing a fall through marker. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ppc64-linux, and aarch64-linux-gnu > with > my fix, applying to trunk. > > 2016-09-29 Marek

Re: C/C++ PATCH to implement -Wpointer-compare warning (PR c++/64767)

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:31:33AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 03:52:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> > I

Re: Move Per Bothner, Andrew Haley, and Tom Tromey to write-after approval after GCJ deletion

On 30/09/16 17:38, Rainer Orth wrote: > but both Per and Tom are still libcpp maintainers, so no need to add > them to the write-after-approval list. Ooh, I had no idea. Will fix, thanks. Andrew.

Re: Move Per Bothner, Andrew Haley, and Tom Tromey to write-after approval after GCJ deletion

Hi Andrew, > Pushed. > > 2016-09-30 Andrew Haley > > * MAINTAINERS: Move Per Bothner, Andrew Haley, and Tom Tromey to > write-after approval after GCJ deletion. but both Per and Tom are still libcpp maintainers, so no need to add them to the

Re: [PATCH] fixincludes: fix fixincludes for MinGW

On 09/30/2016 10:18 AM, Bruce Korb wrote: Hi Tadek, Looks good to me. Thank you. Clear to send (push). Committed on behalf of Tadek. Thanks, jeff

Move Per Bothner, Andrew Haley, and Tom Tromey to write-after approval after GCJ deletion

Pushed. 2016-09-30 Andrew Haley * MAINTAINERS: Move Per Bothner, Andrew Haley, and Tom Tromey to write-after approval after GCJ deletion. Index: MAINTAINERS === --- MAINTAINERS (revision 240658)

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:10:55AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > I haven't been following the discussion very closely so I may have > missed that what I'm about to suggest has been discussed and rejected > for some valid reason, but if not let me try. > > It seems to me that the ultimate, long

Re: [PATCH] fixincludes: fix fixincludes for MinGW

Hi Tadek, Looks good to me. Thank you. Clear to send (push).

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

I haven't been following the discussion very closely so I may have missed that what I'm about to suggest has been discussed and rejected for some valid reason, but if not let me try. It seems to me that the ultimate, long term goal should be to have actively maintained code bases gradually

Re: Use version namespace in normal mode

On 29/09/16 21:59 +0200, François Dumont wrote: Hi I think _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_ALGO should default to _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION when parallel mode is not active. Same for _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER, no ? Hmm, yes, I think this is correct, otherwise we're missing the

Re: [PATCH] Delete GCJ

On 05/09/16 17:25, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > And here is the patch for the web pages. > > Note I did not include all the removed java/* contents. Is there > anything particular you'd like to retain there? No, please delete it all. Thanks, Andrew.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Extend -falign-FOO=N to N[,M[,N2[,M2]]]

On 09/30/2016 01:20 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 09/29/2016 07:32 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On 09/29/2016 04:45 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 09/28/2016 02:57 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: - /* Comes from final.c -- no real reason to change it. */ -#define MAX_CODE_ALIGN 16 - case

Re: [PATCH][v4] GIMPLE store merging pass

On 30/09/16 15:36, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Richard, On 29/09/16 11:45, Richard Biener wrote: + + /* In some cases get_inner_reference may return a + MEM_REF [ptr + byteoffset]. For the purposes of this pass + canonicalize the base_addr to MEM_REF [ptr] and take +

Re: [PATCH][v4] GIMPLE store merging pass

Hi Richard, On 29/09/16 11:45, Richard Biener wrote: + + /* In some cases get_inner_reference may return a +MEM_REF [ptr + byteoffset]. For the purposes of this pass +canonicalize the base_addr to MEM_REF [ptr] and take +byteoffset

[gomp4] remove some tile tests

In implementing tile I discovered two existing runtime tile tests. These were only passing because tile was completely ignored. One of them exposes a latent bug in collapse, in my WIP, but I don't want to get distracted by that right now. Better to have tile tests test tile tiles. nathan

Re:[PATCH] [ARC] Disable compact casesi patterns for arcv2

Please find the updated patch, Claudiu gcc/ 2016-05-09 Claudiu Zissulescu * common/config/arc/arc-common.c (arc_option_optimization_table): Remove compact casesi option. * config/arc/arc.c (arc_override_options): Use compact casesi option

libgo patch committed: Copy locking code from Go 1.7 master library

This patch to libgo copies the locking code from the Go 1.7 master library, replacing C code for locking with Go code. The result is more efficient on most systems, though it is essentially the same on GNU/Linux. Add a shell script mkrsysinfo.sh to generate the runtime_sysinfo.go file, so that

[PATCH] Remove use of std::abs in experimental::{gcd,lcm}

std::abs isn't suitable for these functions because we need something that works in constexpr functions and with unsigned types. Also, is supposed to include . PR libstdc++/77801 * include/experimental/numeric: Include . (__abs): Define. (gcd, lcm): Use __abs

Re: [PATCH] Reduce stack usage in sha512 (PR target/77308)

On 09/30/16 12:14, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> A comment before the SETs and a testcase would be nice. IIRC >>> we do have stack size testcases via using -fstack-usage. >> >> Or -Wstack-usage, which might be more appropriate here. > > Yes. good idea. I was not aware that we

[PATCHv2][GCC] Optimise the fpclassify builtin to perform integer operations when possible

Hi All, This is v2 of the patch which adds an optimized route to the fpclassify builtin for floating point numbers which are similar to IEEE-754 in format. I have addressed most comments from everyone except for two things: 1) Providing a back-end hook to override the functionality. While

Re: [PATCH] Define 3-argument overloads of std::hypot for C++17 (P0030R1)

On 30/09/16 14:13 +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 30/09/16 10:35, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 29/09/16 14:37, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: On arm-none-eabi I'm seeing a failure for the long double type and inputs: { 1e-2l, 1e-4l, 1e-4l, 0.0150004999375l } The abs(frac) is higher than the

Re: [PATCH] Define 3-argument overloads of std::hypot for C++17 (P0030R1)

On 30/09/16 10:35, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 29/09/16 14:37, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> >> On arm-none-eabi I'm seeing a failure for the long double type and inputs: >> { 1e-2l, 1e-4l, 1e-4l, 0.0150004999375l } >> >> The abs(frac) is higher than the toler: 1.73455e-16 vs 1e-16. Is that

Re: [Testsuite] Use correct effective-target settings for ARM fp16-aapcs tests.

On 30/09/16 10:31, Matthew Wahab wrote: The recently added tests gcc.target/arm/aapcs-{3,4}.c are intended to check the behaviour of th ARM Alternative FP16 format. They both check for compiler support of FP16 using dg-require-effective-target arm_fp16_ok This is too weak since the directive is

Re: [PATCH, RFC] gcov: dump in a static dtor instead of in an atexit handler

Hi Martin, > On 09/30/2016 02:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> this would be i386-pc-solaris2.12. I'm not sure if the constructor >> priority detection works in a cross scenario. >> >> I'm attaching the resulting assembly (although for Solaris as, the gas >> build is still running). > > Hi. Sorry,

Re: [PATCH] Delete GCJ

On 30/09/16 11:27, Marek Polacek wrote: > Can we move forward with this patch, then? I've been travelling for several weeks. However, I'm back at my desk now, so I can move this forward. I have all the approvals and everybody has had time to respond. However, I'll need to pull some more recent

Re: [PATCH, RFC] gcov: dump in a static dtor instead of in an atexit handler

On 09/30/2016 02:31 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > this would be i386-pc-solaris2.12. I'm not sure if the constructor > priority detection works in a cross scenario. > > I'm attaching the resulting assembly (although for Solaris as, the gas > build is still running). Hi. Sorry, I have a stupid

Re: [PATCH, RFC] gcov: dump in a static dtor instead of in an atexit handler

.long .LCFI34-.LCFI33 .byte 0xd .byte 0x6 .byte 0x4 .long .LCFI35-.LCFI34 .byte 0xc .byte 0x7 .byte 0x8 .align 8 .LEFDE23: .hidden __dso_handle .ident "GCC: (GNU) 7.0.0 20160930 (experimental) [trunk revision 240649]" .section.text._ZN4TestC2Ev%_ZN4TestC5Ev,"ax",@progbits _ZN4TestC5Ev: .section.text._ZN4TestD2Ev%_ZN4TestD5Ev,"ax",@progbits _ZN4TestD5Ev:

Re: [wwwdocs] Make it more obvious which releases are still supported

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > This adjusts the front page and the news page for each release to > clarify that past releases are no longer maintained. > > OK for wwwdocs? Ok. Thanks, Richard. >

[wwwdocs] Make it more obvious which releases are still supported

This adjusts the front page and the news page for each release to clarify that past releases are no longer maintained. OK for wwwdocs? Index: htdocs/index.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v retrieving revision

[gomp4] improve collapse user var calculation

In working on tile I noticed an unnecessary modulo operation for the calculation of the outermost loop's user iteration variable. By construction the modulo operator is useless here. Took the opportunity of moving the modulo and division operations next to eachother so it'd be easier to make

Re: [PATCH, RFC] gcov: dump in a static dtor instead of in an atexit handler

On 09/30/16 05:22, Rainer Orth wrote: While this would take care of the testsuite failures, this creates a terrible user experience outside of the testsuite: if we know that -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage cannot work on targets without constructor priority support, the compiler should error out

Adjust fall through comments in aarch64-simd.md

It's unclear whether we'll handle /* Else, fall through. */ in the nearest future, so I'll just change it to a recognizable format instead. When this is in, I can remove the recently added -Wno-error lines in Makefile.in. Bootstrapped on aarch64-linux. I'm checking this in. 2016-09-30 Marek

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Extend -falign-FOO=N to N[,M[,N2[,M2]]]

On 09/29/2016 07:32 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On 09/29/2016 04:45 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 09/28/2016 02:57 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: - /* Comes from final.c -- no real reason to change it. */ -#define MAX_CODE_ALIGN 16 - case OPT_malign_loops_: warning_at (loc, 0,

Re: [PATCH, RFC] gcov: dump in a static dtor instead of in an atexit handler

On 09/30/2016 11:22 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Hi Martin, > >>> the testcase FAILs on Solaris 12 (both SPARC and x86): >>> >>> +FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/pr16855.C -std=gnu++11 gcov: 1 failures in line >>> counts, 0 i >>> n branch percentages, 0 in return percentages, 0 in intermediate format >>> +FAIL:

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:42:20PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 09/30/2016 11:45 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > See Tom Tromey's explanation why accepting too much is bad (at least unless > > we want multiple levels). > > And I still don't buy it. The case where someone writes "Don't fall

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wimplicit-fallthrough -C, handle some more comment styles and comments in between FALLTHRU comment and label

On 09/30/2016 12:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:42:20PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 09/30/2016 11:45 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: See Tom Tromey's explanation why accepting too much is bad (at least unless we want multiple levels). And I still don't buy it. The case

  1   2   >