On 18 October 2016 at 17:35, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 18 October 2016 at 16:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> On 10/18/16 10:36, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>
>>> I am seeing a lot of regressions since this patch was committed:
>>> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/2
On 19 October 2016 at 03:03, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 11:23 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>> The divmod transform isn't enabled if target supports hardware div in
>> the same or wider mode even if divmod libfunc is available for the
>> given mode.
>
> Good. That seems like the right th
Hi,
While computing jump function value range for pointer, I am wondering if
we can assume that any tree with ADDR_EXPR will be nonnull.
That is, in cases like:
int arr[10];
foo (&arr[1]);
OR
struct st
{
int a;
int b;
};
struct st s2;
foo (&s2.a);
Attached patch tries to do this. I am
This patch broke bootstrap on AIX.
In altivec_init_builtins(), the loop to initialize predicates is
encountering mode1 == SImode.
Thanks, David
Hi Folks,
The attached patch does some minor cleanup and bumps the libgfortran version
number. I have wanted to reorder the dtp structure for many years now. Not
strictly needed but it has bugged me forever.
The bump is needed because of the significant changes from implementation of
DTIO.
On 09/13/2016 04:28 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/19/2016 08:58 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I'd just drop the /*strict_mode_p*/ comment in both places it appears in
your patch's change to passes.def. I think we've generally frowned on
those embedded comments, even though some have snuck in.
I've s
On 10/17/2016 11:23 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
The divmod transform isn't enabled if target supports hardware div in
the same or wider mode even if divmod libfunc is available for the
given mode.
Good. That seems like the right thing to do.
Thanks. I had erroneously assumed __udivimoddi4
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:58:49PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their
> > CUDA
> > version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host.
>
> The currently published OpenMP version of
> I don't fully understand what you mean. This code was created for
> PR65810, if that helps?
OK, let's turn it into "mode" then, this doesn't change anything.
--
Eric Botcazou
> Agreed, let's do that for starters.
Here it is, applied on the mainline.
2016-10-18 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/Makefile.in (EXTRA_GNATRTL_NONTASKING_OBJS): Define.
(EXTRA_GNATRTL_TASKING_OBJS): Likewise.
(ARM/Android): Add atomic support.
(SPARC/Solaris):
[CCing Richard; this is re:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00273.html
]
Essentially I want to split class rtx_reader into two parts: a base class
covering the things implemented in read-md.o, and a subclass implemented in
read-rtl.o.
The motivation is that I want to make some o
... sorry, what I sent earlier in fact causes a regression in the
libstdc++-v3 testsuite: 23_containers/list/61347.cc.
Thus, I'm back to one of my first tries earlier today: a much more
conservative change which uses fold_non_dependent_expr only for the
purpose of suppressing the unwanted warn
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 08:37:47PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > We need to pass the mode of the actual datum we would put in the TOC to
> > the use_toc_relative_ref function, not the mode of its address.
>
> Right, but this mode is not "mode", the TOC contains only Pmode entries if
> the
> sp
Hi!
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 15:38:50 +0200, I wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:08:44 +0200, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Thomas Schwinge
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:22:17 +0200, Richard Biener
> > > wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Thomas
The patch here, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01872.html,
attempted to scale down the register limit used by -fsched-pressure for the
case where the block in question executes as frequently as the entry block to
just the call_clobbered (i.e. call_used) regs. But the code is actua
Hi!
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 07:38:17 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On October 17, 2016 6:09:02 PM GMT+02:00, Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> >[FOR_ALL_BB_FN]
> >
> >We could use the former in a few more places; OK for trunk once tested?
>
> OK.
As posted, committed to trunk in r241315:
commit 195917
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:22 AM, augustine.sterl...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
>> Define LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE to unwind-dw2-fde.c in
>> xtensa/t-elf and to unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c in xtensa/t-linux and use
>> LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE in
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:22 AM, augustine.sterl...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
>>
>> Use new FPU instruction sequences documented in the ISA book to
>> implement __divsf3, __divdf3, __recipsf2, __recipdf2, __rsqrtsf2,
>> __rsqrtdf2 and __ieee754_sqrt
On 18/10/16 19:30 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
A couple of minor things I found whlie reviewing this code.
* include/experimental/bits/shared_ptr.h (shared_ptr(shared_ptr&&)):
Remove const from parameter.
(operator<(const shared_ptr&, nullptr_t)): Use correct
spe
> We need to pass the mode of the actual datum we would put in the TOC to
> the use_toc_relative_ref function, not the mode of its address.
Right, but this mode is not "mode", the TOC contains only Pmode entries if the
special constant pool is excluded.
--
Eric Botcazou
A couple of minor things I found whlie reviewing this code.
* include/experimental/bits/shared_ptr.h (shared_ptr(shared_ptr&&)):
Remove const from parameter.
(operator<(const shared_ptr&, nullptr_t)): Use correct
specialization of std::less.
* testsuite/exp
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
> Define LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE to unwind-dw2-fde.c in
> xtensa/t-elf and to unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c in xtensa/t-linux and use
> LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE in LIB2ADDEH definition.
>
> 2016-10-17 Max Filippov
> libgcc/
> *
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
>
> Use new FPU instruction sequences documented in the ISA book to
> implement __divsf3, __divdf3, __recipsf2, __recipdf2, __rsqrtsf2,
> __rsqrtdf2 and __ieee754_sqrtf and __ieee754_sqrt.
>
> 2013-02-12 Ding-Kai Chen
> libgcc/
> * c
On 10/18/16 19:05, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts,
>> to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday.
>
> This patch seems to be missing testcases (that warned befor
James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:38:36PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>> + /* We need two add/sub instructions, each one perform part of the
>> + addition/subtraction, but don't this if the addend can be loaded into
>> + register by single instruction, in that case we pr
On 10/18/2016 02:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I don't even think we have a way of knowing in the compiler if the target
has enabled divmod support in libgcc.
Yeah, that's what bothers me with the current optab libfunc query
setup -- it isn't reliable.
I wonder if we ought to just have them all
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:38:36PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
> ping
>
>
> From: Wilco Dijkstra
> Sent: 10 August 2016 17:20
> To: Richard Earnshaw; GCC Patches
> Cc: nd
> Subject: Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve stack adjustment
>
> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > I see you've added a default
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts,
> to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday.
This patch seems to be missing testcases (that warned before the patch
and don't warn after it).
--
Jose
Hi,
this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts,
to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday.
Bootstrap and reg-testing on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu was fine.
Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks
Bernd.
2016-10-17 Bernd Edlinger
* c-common.c (c_common_truthvalue
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their CUDA
> version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host.
The currently published OpenMP version of LULESH simply doesn't use openmp-simd
anywhere. This should make it obvious that i
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 03:54:43PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 03:54 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> >
> > I do really prefer reading code where variables are declared at first
> > use
>
> In general, so do I, but in this case it's one variable out of a whole
> bunch, which makes the
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:40:18PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
> ping
>
> If the number of integer callee-saves is odd, the FP callee-saves use 8-byte
> aligned LDP/STP. Since 16-byte alignment may be faster on some CPUs, align
> the FP callee-saves to 16 bytes and use the alignment gap for th
Hi Richard,
This patch is a merge of [1] and [2] and implements the manual merging of
bitfields
as outlined in [1] but actually makes it work on BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN too.
It caused me a lot of headeache because the bit offset is counted from the most
significant bit
in the byte, even though BITS_BI
Hi,
in the language of our implementations details, submitter noticed that
in terms of warnings we handle in a different way COND_EXPRs in
tsubst_copy_and_build - we use fold_non_dependent_expr and integer_zerop
to suppress undesired warnings by bumping c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings
- and IF_
Hi Paul,
> For reasons I don't understand, sometimes the expression type comes
> through as BT_DERIVED, whilst the symbol is BT_CLASS. I could repair
> this in resolve.c(fixup_array_ref) if you think that would be cleaner.
I think that I figured the rule:
- when no _class-ref is present, then th
On 10/18/2016 12:54 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I'll wait a bit longer for any objections, as the refactoring could be
> seen as unnecessary churn, but I think it's valuable housekeeping.
Having stared at std::unique_ptr a lot recently, I like this, FWIW.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
Hi Andre,
Thanks for a quick response:
> You can use
>
>|| (e->symtree && UNLIMITED_POLY (e->symtree->n.sym));
Ah yes, you are quite right.
> here. UNLIMITED_POLY does all the checks. I am still wondering whether this is
> necessary? The symtree is set for expr_type == { EXPR_VARIABLE, EXPR
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:22:27AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > this is the patch compensating testsuite I commited after re-testing
> > > on x86_64-linux.
> > >
> > > Other placements of early_thread_jumps does not work veyr wel
On 18 October 2016 at 16:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 10/18/16 10:36, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> I am seeing a lot of regressions since this patch was committed:
>> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/241273/report-build-info.html
>>
>> (you can click on "REGRE
Hi Paul,
> Index: gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
> ===
> *** gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c (revision 241273)
> --- gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c (working copy)
> *** trans_associate_var (gfc_symbol *sym, gf
> *** 1517,1523
>
On 10/18/2016 05:31 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> > I see your point and agree that current code isn't optimal. However, I
>> > don't think your patch is accurate either. Consider
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Register-Basics.html and let's
>> > assume that FIXED_REGISTERS in class
Hello!
We have to return Pmode RTX from legitimize_tls_address. There was a
path that returned DImode, when SImode was expected. Since the code
deals with various linker bugs, let's leave the generated sequence
as-is and just convert it to Pmode before return.
2016-10-18 Uros Bizjak
PR ta
On 10/18/16 10:36, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
> I am seeing a lot of regressions since this patch was committed:
> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/241273/report-build-info.html
>
> (you can click on "REGRESSED" to see the list of regressions, "sum"
> and "log" to
Dear All,
This bug was caused by 'associate name' and 'associate entity'
expressions being incomplete when the 'selector' was an intrinsic
function result. I tried to fix this at source, in match_select _type
and gfc_get_variable_expr, but caused a vast number of breakages.
Undoubtedly, this would
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Matthew Fortune
> > wrote:
> > > I'd therefore like to apply the following. Any suggestions on the
> > > testing that this needs? Would a build + regression run of GCC with
> > > binutils configured --disable-plugins be suffic
On 10/18/2016 02:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Hi,
this is a regression present on the mainline and 6 branch: the compiler now
generates wrong code for the attached testcase at -O because of an internal
conflict about boolean types. The seq
For
extern void baz ();
extern void boo ();
extern void bla ();
int a[100];
void foo (int n)
{
for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j)
{
if (a[j+5])
{
if (a[j])
break;
baz ();
}
else
bla ();
boo ();
}
}
we happen to visit BB
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:34:58PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead
> > after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs
> > (sth we missed as well).
> >
> > Boo
On 10/18/2016 03:54 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
I do really prefer reading code where variables are declared at first
use
In general, so do I, but in this case it's one variable out of a whole
bunch, which makes the entire thing look a little inconsistent.
Bernd
On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 15:30 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> I you wish I can send you a tarball with the preprocessed *.i files from
> ffmpeg, so that you can use a stage1 cross on them.
>
That would be very helpful, thanks!
Bill
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:18:42PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> > {
> > - rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, insn, dest, seq;
> > + rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, dest, seq;
> > + rtx_insn *insn;
> >
> >switch (tls_symboli
Hi,
The previous solution for PR77916 was inadequately tested, for which I
sincerely apologize. I've reinstated the stopgap fix previously
reverted, as follows.
Thanks for your patience,
Bill
2016-10-18 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/77916
* gimple-ssa-strength-reduction
On 2016.10.18 at 08:15 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation
> > > where SLSR will ICE when exp
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:25:55PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> > From: Trevor Saunders
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders
> >
> > * ccmp.c (expand_ccmp_expr_1): Adjust.
> > (expand_ccmp_expr): Likewis
While testing a libgo patch on Solaris, which does not support
split-stack, I ran across a bug in the handling of caller-saved
registers for the garbage collector. For non-split-stack systems,
runtime_mcall is responsible for saving all caller-saved registers on
the stack so that the GC stack scan
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:34:58PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead
> after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs
> (sth we missed as well).
>
> Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
> Richard Biener:
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
Mike Stump:
> On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Ximin Luo wrote:
>> Therefore, it is better to emit it in al
On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation
> > where SLSR will ICE when exposed to a cast from integer to pointer. This
> > is because w
Hi Uros,
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from:
>>
>> $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z
>> -01
>>
>> Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure.
>
> Forgot to say that the patch was tested with tzdata2016g on Fedora 24
> and CentO
Richard Biener:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
>>>
>>> Mike Stump:
On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Ximin Luo wrote:
> Therefore, it is better to emit it in all circumstances, in case the
> reader needs to know wh
The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead
after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs
(sth we missed as well).
Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2016-10-18 Richard Biener
* tree-vrp.c (evrp_dom_walker:
On 10/18/2016 02:15 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
Will do both the changes and re-run the reg tests. Ok for trunk if the
tests pass for x86_64-pc-linux and avr?
Probably but let's see the patch first.
Bernd
Bernd Schmidt writes:
> On 10/13/2016 08:57 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>>
>> 2016-10-13 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
>>
>> * reload.c (find_valid_class_1): Allow regclass if atleast one
>> regno in class is ok. Compute and use rclass size based on
>> actually available regnos f
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from:
>>
>> $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z
>> -01
>>
>> Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure.
>
> Forgot to say that the patch was teste
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from:
>
> $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z
> -01
>
> Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure.
Forgot to say that the patch was tested with tzdata2016g on Fedora 24
and CentOS 5.11.
Uros.
Hi,
When analyzing reg test failures for the avr target, I noticed that the
torture options were different when running dg-torture.exp compared to
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, resulting in additional failures. I also found
that a bunch of "torture-without-loops not empty as expected" errors
sho
On 17/10/16 14:37 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
We are incorrectly requiring unique_ptr deleters to be copyable here:
explicit
unique_ptr(pointer __p) noexcept
: _M_t(__p, deleter_type())
{ }
We could just do:
explicit
unique_ptr(pointer __p) noexcept
: _M_t()
{
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF.
> >
> > I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more?
>
> MODE is the mode of operands[1] before:
>
> operands[1] = force_const_mem (mode, operands[1]
These variable templates give warnings in C++11 mode when
-Wsystem-headers is used:
In file included from /home/jwakely/gcc/7/include/c++/7.0.0/memory:77:0,
from vt.cc:1:
/home/jwakely/gcc/7/include/c++/7.0.0/bits/uses_allocator.h:130:20: warning:
variable templates only availabl
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders
* ccmp.c (expand_ccmp_expr_1): Adjust.
(expand_ccmp_expr): Likewise.
(expand_ccmp_next): Likewise.
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_ge
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders
* cfgrtl.c (delete_insn_chain): Change argument type to rtx_insn *
and adjust for that.
* cfgrtl.h (delete_insn_chain): Adjust prototype.
Ok.
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders
* emit-rtl.c (prev_nonnote_insn_bb): Change argument type to
rtx_insn *.
* rtl.h (prev_nonnote_insn_bb): Adjust prototype.
Ok.
Bernd
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders
* config/rl78/rl78.c (gen-and_emit_move): Change argument type
to rtx_insn *.
(transcode_memory_rtx): Likewise.
(move_to_acc): Likewise.
(move_from_acc): Likewise.
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
{
- rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, insn, dest, seq;
+ rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, dest, seq;
+ rtx_insn *insn;
switch (tls_symbolic_operand_type (x))
{
@@ -1025,66 +1026,70 @@ alpha_legitimize_address_1 (rtx x
> > No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF.
>
> I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more?
MODE is the mode of operands[1] before:
operands[1] = force_const_mem (mode, operands[1]);
and after. But the test is on the address of the MEM, not on the MEM i
On 10/17/2016 07:06 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
I've just pushed two commits to the branch to fix this issue. Before those, the
last commit left the branch in a state where an incremental build seemed ok
(because libgcc/libgomp weren't rebuilt with the new cc1), but a from-scratch
build was br
[ sorry for losing track of this patch ]
On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 10:32:51AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Use "mode" instead of "Pmode" here?
>
> No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF.
I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more?
Segher
On 10/13/2016 08:57 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
2016-10-13 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
* reload.c (find_valid_class_1): Allow regclass if atleast one
regno in class is ok. Compute and use rclass size based on
actually available regnos for mode in rclass.
gcc/testsui
> On Oct 18, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Pat Haugen wrote:
>>
>> On 10/17/2016 08:17 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
The patch here, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01872.html,
attempted to scale down the register limit used b
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
* cfgcleanup.c (merge_blocks_move_successor_nojumps): Adjust.
(outgoing_edges_match): Likewise.
(try_crossjump_to_edge): Likewise.
* cfgrtl.c (try_redirect_by_replacing_jump): Likewise.
(rtl_tidy_fal
On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
+static inline void
+set_label_ref_label (rtx ref, rtx_insn *label)
+{
+ XCEXP (ref, 0, LABEL_REF) = label;
+}
I guess I have to ask for a brief function comment for this. Otherwise OK.
Bernd
> On Oct 17, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Pat Haugen wrote:
>
> On 10/17/2016 08:17 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>> The patch here, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01872.html,
>>> attempted to scale down the register limit used by -fsched-pressure for the
>>> case where the block in question
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>> +static bool *newunits;
>
> You could make this a bitmap (like sbitmap). A bit more code but makes
> a potentially quadratic search (when opening many units) less time
> consuming.
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:46:29PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>> > I'm not convinced it is desirable to backport such changes, it affects ABI,
>> > people are used to deal with minor ABI changes in between major GCC
>> > releases, but we'd need a strong reason to
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:46:29PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> > I'm not convinced it is desirable to backport such changes, it affects ABI,
> > people are used to deal with minor ABI changes in between major GCC
> > releases, but we'd need a strong reason to change it between minor rele
On 2016.10.18 at 11:19 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 18 October 2016 at 05:18, Markus Trippelsdorf
> wrote:
> > On 2016.10.18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> >> On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
On 18 October 2016 at 05:18, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2016.10.18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>> On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation
>> > where SLSR will ICE when exposed
The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from:
$ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z
-01
Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure.
Uros.
diff --git a/libgo/go/time/time_test.go b/libgo/go/time/time_test.go
index b7ebb37..694e311 100644
--- a/libgo/go/time/time_test.go
+++ b/libgo/go/time/time_tes
Ping!
Regards
Senthil
Senthil Kumar Selvaraj writes:
> Bernd Schmidt writes:
>
>> On 09/16/2016 09:02 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>>> Does this make sense? I ran a reg test for the avr target with a
>>> slightly older version of this patch, it did not show any regressions.
>>> If thi
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Richard Biener writes:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>>
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> +static bool *newunits;
You could make this a bitmap (like sbitmap). A bit more code but makes
a potentially quadratic search (when opening many units) less time
consuming.
Ciao!
Steven
Hi,
On 17 October 2016 at 18:47, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 30/09/16 14:34, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> 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 usin
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a regression present on the mainline and 6 branch: the compiler now
> generates wrong code for the attached testcase at -O because of an internal
> conflict about boolean types. The sequence is as follows. In .mergephi3:
>
>
Hi Jonathan,
On 17 October 2016 at 13:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> In C++17 the emplace_front and emplace_back members return a
> reference. There isn't a very neat way to implement this, so it's just
> lots of conditional compilation.
>
> This isn't an ABI break, because these member functions
On 18 October 2016 at 13:55, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 18 October 2016 at 02:46, Jeff Law wrote:
>> > On 10/15/2016 11:59 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This patch is mostly the same as previous one, except it drops
>> >> targeting
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 18 October 2016 at 02:46, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 10/15/2016 11:59 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >>
> >> This patch is mostly the same as previous one, except it drops
> >> targeting __udivmoddi4() because it gave undefined reference link
> >
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
>>
>> Mike Stump:
>>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Ximin Luo wrote:
Therefore, it is better to emit it in all circumstances, in case the
reader needs to know what the working
dire
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
> wrote:
> >
> > Richard Biener writes:
> >
> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The fix for PR 52085 went into tr
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
> wrote:
> >
> > Richard Biener writes:
> >
> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The fix for PR 52085 went into tr
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
wrote:
>
> Richard Biener writes:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The fix for PR 52085 went into trunk when trunk was 6.0. I ran into the
>>> same issue on a gcc 5.x and found that
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo