On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 11:40:44AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>> The attached patch fixes the stack layout problems on AIX and
>> Power as described here:
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77359
>>
>> The patch has been boot
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 07.10.2016 23:08, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> Hi,
>> This patch adds ilp32 multi-arch support. This is needed to support
>> multi-arch on Debian like systems.
>>
>> OK? Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions.
>>
As I mentioned in my other emails, parsing /proc/cpuinfo has one issue
is that the current parsing assumes many different things about the
format. So the best way to do this is to parse
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuN/regs/identification/midr_el1 files
instead. To get which cpu are present (though n
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 07:21:15PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> --- gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md (revision 242048)
> +++ gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md (revision 242049)
> @@ -2542,10 +2542,13 @@ (define_insn "vsx_extract__p9"
>"VECTOR_MEM_VSX_P (mode) && TARGET_VEXTRACTUB
> && TARGET_VSX_SMALL
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Pat Haugen wrote:
> The following fixes a problem introduced by my earlier loop unroller patch,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01612.html. In instances where
> the niter expr is not reliable we need to still emit an initial peel copy of
> the loo
Aaron Sawdey has been running the GCC testsuite on the power9 simulator and he
noticed that:
gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68532.c
does not run, and opened bug 78243 for this failure.
Now, if you compile pr68532 with normal options (-O2/-O3 and -mcpu=power8 or
-mcpu=power9) it works because wi
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:47:02AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 11:40:44AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > The attached patch fixes the stack layout problems on AIX and
> > Power as described here:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77359
> >
> > The pat
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 11:40:44AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> The attached patch fixes the stack layout problems on AIX and
> Power as described here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77359
>
> The patch has been bootstrapped on AIX (32 Bit) and bootstrappend
> and regression
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 02:42:24PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Kyrill Tkachov
> > I ran SPEC2006 on a Cortex-A72. Overall scores were neutral but there were
> > some interesting swings.
> > 458.sjeng +1.45%
> > 471.omnetpp +2.19%
> > 445.gobmk -2.01%
> >
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:53:07PM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:46:38PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Dominik Vogt
> >>wrote:
> >>>Something like the attached patch? Robin and me have spen
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> This patch documents the newly added flag in gcc 7 for the upcoming
> Qualcomm Falkor processor core.
Looks good to me. Probably a good idea for one of the ARM maintainers
to sign off, too.
Gerald
This patch to the Go frontend and libgo copies the signal code from
the Go 1.7 runtime.
This adds a little shell script to auto-generate runtime.sigtable from
the known signal names.
This forces the main package to always import the runtime package.
Otherwise some runtime package global variables
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:46:38PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
Something like the attached patch? Robin and me have spent quite
some time to figure out the new pattern. Two questions:
1) In the ma
Hi all,
I now committed this, with changelog
PR rtl-optimization/78232
* combine.c (try_combine): Add a big comment about why reusing i2dest
is undesirable.
(change_zero_ext): Do not call simplify_gen_binary, do the
simplifications manually.
and the patch
FAIL: gfortran.dg/char_result_16.f90 -g -flto (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/char_result_16.f90 -g -flto (test for excess errors)
The ICE is for both -m32 and -m64 (module_procedure_3_db_1.f90 is the test
posted in my last mail)
% gfc module_procedure_3_db_1.f90 -flto
module_p
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch implements the new separate shrink-wrapping hooks for aarch64.
> In separate shrink wrapping (as I understand it) we consider each register
> save/restore as
> a 'component' that can be performed independently of the o
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 01:42:20PM -0800, Jason Merrill wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/auto-fn33.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> +// PR c++/77337
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
> +
> +template
> +struct fix_type {
> + Functor functor;
> +
> + decltype(auto) operator()(
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> I'll address those comments. As you did not have any comments on the
> c-parser.[CH] parts does that mean you are fine with them? That is,
> does the above constitute a complete review of the patch?
I am fine with the c-parser.[ch] parts.
--
Jose
The constexpr lambda change introduced some problematic dependency
ordering, since instantiate constexpr functions aggressively so that
they are available for constexpr evaluation. The patch for 65942
delayed that instantiation by triggering it from constexpr evaluation
directly rather than earlie
On Nov 10 2016, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 03:40 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> As seen by the testcase in PR77822, combine can generate out-of-range
>> bit pos in a bit-field insn, unless the pattern explicitly rejects it.
>> This only makes a difference for expressions that are undefined at
On 11/09/2016 03:40 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
As seen by the testcase in PR77822, combine can generate out-of-range
bit pos in a bit-field insn, unless the pattern explicitly rejects it.
This only makes a difference for expressions that are undefined at
runtime. Without that we would either gene
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>> This patch copies the code that implements the print and println
>> predeclared functions from the Go 1.7 runtime. The compiler is
>> changed to use the new names, and to call the printlock and
>> printunlock functions around a sequence of
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:46:38PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > Something like the attached patch? Robin and me have spent quite
> > some time to figure out the new pattern. Two questions:
> >
> > 1) In the match expression you cannot jus
I've committed this patch to gomp-4_0-branch which removes
OMP_CLAUSE_DEVICE_RESIDENT. This standalone clause is no longer
necessary, and hasn't been for a while, because device_resident is
treated as a data mapping type for OMP_CLAUSE_MAP, and not a clause itself.
Cesar
2016-11-10 Cesar Philippi
Hi,
On 10 November 2016 at 18:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On arm/aarch64 we ICE because some decls that make it here has non-NULL
> DECL_SIZE, which is a VAR_DECL rather than CONST_INT (or DECL_SIZE that
> doesn't fit into shwi would ICE similarly). While it is arguably a FE bug
> that it
Hi David,
Sorry about the breakage. I have already reverted this patch as this is
causing bootstrap failures. I will test it on more targets before
submitting this patch again.
Thanks,
Kugan
On 11/11/16 00:25, David Edelsohn wrote:
Kugan
Is there a PR for this failure? It broke bootstrap
All,
The attached fixes an ICE-on-invalid-code, specifically due to invalid
anonymous structure declarations, as seen in the attached test case.
This also improves error handling in such cases- the anonymous
structure body will continue to be parsed even if the variable-decl
after the opening vari
On November 10, 2016 6:38:12 PM GMT+01:00, Joseph Myers
wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> +/* Parse a gimple expression.
>> +
>> + gimple-expression:
>> + gimple-unary-expression
>> + gimple-call-statement
>> + gimple-binary-expression
>> + gimple-assign-ex
On November 10, 2016 7:39:57 PM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse
wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> The following fixes PR71762 via reverting the transforms of
>> ~X & Y to X < Y and similar because when the bools they apply to
>> are expanded to RTL undefined values are not reliably z
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
The following fixes PR71762 via reverting the transforms of
~X & Y to X < Y and similar because when the bools they apply to
are expanded to RTL undefined values are not reliably zero-extended
and thus the transform is invalid. Ensuring the zero-extens
Hi,
This patch documents the newly added flag in gcc 7 for the upcoming
Qualcomm Falkor processor core.
Siddhesh
Index: htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.24
di
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> This patch is for a long-standing issue with the way -fno-common is
> documented. The specific bug report was about an ambiguous use of the word
> "This", but as I looked more at the way this option was described, I realized
> the whole thing was nee
This patch is for a long-standing issue with the way -fno-common is
documented. The specific bug report was about an ambiguous use of the
word "This", but as I looked more at the way this option was described,
I realized the whole thing was needlessly confusing because it didn't
use the correc
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:05:25AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> > I have built the spec 2006 CPU benchmark suite with these changes, and the
> > power8 (ISA 2.07) code generation does not change.
>
> Very good to hear :-)
>
> Just some nits; okay for trunk with that fixed:
>
OpenACC 2.0a has limited support for fortran derived types. Basically,
derived type variables are only supported in ACC UPDATE. Rather than
adding generalized support for derived times in the gimplifier, this
patch has the fortran FE pass both subarrays and arrays as void pointers
with an appropria
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> +/* Parse a gimple expression.
> +
> + gimple-expression:
> + gimple-unary-expression
> + gimple-call-statement
> + gimple-binary-expression
> + gimple-assign-expression
> + gimple-cast-expression
I don't see any comments expandin
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:29:12AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 05:15:53PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > If maybe_record_trace_start fails because the CFI is inconsistent on two
> > paths into a block it currently just ICEs. This changes it to also d
On 11/10/2016 08:24 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/10/2016 05:17 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
Maybe instead of adding "maybe", we need to change the severity of the
warning so that the warning is not emitted by default.
Adding the warning option to -Wextra can be solution. Is it acceptable
approac
Ping.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 05:15:53PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> If maybe_record_trace_start fails because the CFI is inconsistent on two
> paths into a block it currently just ICEs. This changes it to also dump
> the CFI on those two paths in the dump file; debugging it without that
>
Improve the logic when setting max_insns_skipped. Limit the maximum size of IT
to MAX_INSN_PER_IT_BLOCK as otherwise multiple IT instructions are needed,
increasing codesize. Given 4 works well for Thumb-2, use the same limit for ARM
for consistency.
ChangeLog:
2016-11-04 Wilco Dijkstra
2016-11-10 20:14 GMT+03:00 Vladimir N Makarov :
>
>
> On 11/10/2016 11:27 AM, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this patch enabled AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions.
>>
>> It requires additional patch for register allocator from Vladimir
>> Makarov to be committed before.
>>
>>
> I
2016-11-10 19:36 GMT+03:00 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 07:27:00PM +0300, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this patch enabled AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions.
>>
>> It requires additional patch for register allocator from Vladimir
>> Makarov to be committed before.
>
>
> On 10 Nov 2016, at 18:14, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
> I think the XGene-1 scheduler might need a similar change as currently all
> AArch64
> shifts are modelled as 2-cycle operations.
Thanks for the heads-up. We’ll indeed need to update this.
Regards,
Philipp.
Improve TI mode address offsets - these may either use LDP of 64-bit or
LDR of 128-bit, so we need to use the correct intersection of offsets.
When splitting a large offset into base and offset, use a signed 9-bit
unscaled offset.
Remove the Ump constraint on movti and movtf instructions as this
On 11/10/2016 11:27 AM, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
Hi,
this patch enabled AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions.
It requires additional patch for register allocator from Vladimir
Makarov to be committed before.
I've just committed the necessary patch.
The second patch updates the Cortex-A57 scheduler now that we can differentiate
between shifts and bitfield inserts. The Cortex-A57 Software Optimization Guide
indicates that BFM operations use the integer multi-cycle pipeline, while ARM
UXTB/H instructions use the Integer 1 or Integer 0 pipelines
gcc/
* internal-fn.c (expand_GOMP_SIMT_LANE): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_VF): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_LAST_LANE): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_ORDERED_PRED): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_VOTE_ANY): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_XCHG_BFLY): New.
(expand_GOMP_SIMT_XCHG
libgomp/
* Makefile.am (libgomp_la_SOURCES): Add atomic.c, icv.c, icv-device.c.
* Makefile.in. Regenerate.
* configure.ac [nvptx*-*-*] (libgomp_use_pthreads): Set and use it...
(LIBGOMP_USE_PTHREADS): ...here; new define.
* configure: Regenerate.
* c
Hi, the following patch is necessary for generation of new Intel insns
requiring 4 aligned zmm regs.
Committed as rev. 242043.
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 242040)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+2016
Currently the SBFM, UBFM and BFM instructions all use the attribute "bfm".
SBFM and UBFM include all shifts on AArch64, which are simpler than bitfield
insert. Add a new bfx attribute for these instructions so that they can be
modelled more accurately in the future. There is no difference in code
Hello,
I'd like to provide an overview of the gomp-nvptx branch status. In response to
this message I'll send two more emails, with libgomp and middle-end changes on
the branch. Some of the changes to libgomp such as build machinery adaptations
have already received substantial comments in 2015,
The existing vector costs stop some beneficial vectorization. This is mostly
due
to vector statement cost being set to 3 as well as vector loads having a higher
cost than scalar loads. This means that even when we vectorize 4x, it is
possible
that the cost of a vectorized loop is similar to the
Hi!
I think it is better to announce 4.5 than 4.0 at the current state.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk.
2016-11-10 Jakub Jelinek
gcc/fortran/
* cpp.c (cpp_define_builtins): Define _OPENMP to 201511 instead
of 201307.
* gfortr
Hi!
On arm/aarch64 we ICE because some decls that make it here has non-NULL
DECL_SIZE, which is a VAR_DECL rather than CONST_INT (or DECL_SIZE that
doesn't fit into shwi would ICE similarly). While it is arguably a FE bug
that it creates for VLA initialization from STRING_CST such a decl,
I belie
OK.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> It seems -Wabi/-Wc++1z-compat warns about mangling changes even for symbols
> that are
> not visible outside of its TU (so likely only inline asm or tools
> looking at .symtab STB_LOCAL symbols would notice). Perhaps that is fi
Hi!
It seems -Wabi/-Wc++1z-compat warns about mangling changes even for symbols
that are
not visible outside of its TU (so likely only inline asm or tools
looking at .symtab STB_LOCAL symbols would notice). Perhaps that is fine
for -Wabi that isn't enabled in -Wall/-Wextra, but -Wc++1z-compat is
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:16:35PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, but maybe introduce a test if the half-wide value fits?
> > >
> > > like:
> > >
> > > #define M_OK2(M, T) ((M) > sizeof(T) *
On 10/11/16 16:26, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
Hi,
Great to see this. Just a few comments...
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 02:25:47PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
+/* Implement TARGET_SHRINK_WRAP_GET_SEPARATE_COMPONENTS. */
+
+static sbitmap
+aarch64_get_separate_components (void)
+{
+ /* C
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 07:27:00PM +0300, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch enabled AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions.
>
> It requires additional patch for register allocator from Vladimir
> Makarov to be committed before.
Your MUA ate tabs (and in the ChangeLog you're usin
Hi,
this patch enabled AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions.
It requires additional patch for register allocator from Vladimir
Makarov to be committed before.
gcc/
* common/config/i386/i386-common.c
(OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX5124FMAPS_SET,
OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX5124FMAPS_U
Hi!
Great to see this. Just a few comments...
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 02:25:47PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> +/* Implement TARGET_SHRINK_WRAP_GET_SEPARATE_COMPONENTS. */
> +
> +static sbitmap
> +aarch64_get_separate_components (void)
> +{
> + /* Calls to alloca further extend the stack fram
On 11/10/2016 05:17 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Maybe instead of adding "maybe", we need to change the severity of the
> warning so that the warning is not emitted by default.
Adding the warning option to -Wextra can be solution. Is it acceptable
approach?
Martin
On 11/10/2016 07:55 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
gcc.c now imposes profile-update=atomic if -pthread is used, even if
the target does not support profile-update=atomic.
ah, that's where this is coming from.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 04:43 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>
On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello.
>
> As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports
>>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 07:43 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>>
>> On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>
On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target s
On 11/10/2016 07:43 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports
atomic updates
for GCOV counter or not, I decided to come up with a new option
valu
Hi Mike,
> I have built the spec 2006 CPU benchmark suite with these changes, and the
> power8 (ISA 2.07) code generation does not change.
Very good to hear :-)
Just some nits; okay for trunk with that fixed:
> +(define_split
> + [(set (match_operand:EXTHI 0 "altivec_register_operand" "")
> +
On 11/10/2016 04:43 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>>> On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports
atomic updates
for GCOV counter or not, I decided to c
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:16:35PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> > Yes, but maybe introduce a test if the half-wide value fits?
> >
> > like:
> >
> > #define M_OK2(M, T) ((M) > sizeof(T) * CHAR_BIT / 2 - 1)
>
> Something like that.
In patch form, that
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>>> On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports
atomic updates
for GCOV counter or not,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Felipe Magno de Almeida
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Sorry for top-posting, but this is a ping for the attached patch.
>
> The patch doesn't seem to have been applied nor refused. So I'm
> pinging to see if I need to change something? I already have a
> copyright assignment
On 11/10/2016 05:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports atomic
updates
for GCOV counter or not, I decided to come up with a new option value
(maybe-atomic),
that would be transformed i
Hello,
Sorry for top-posting, but this is a ping for the attached patch.
The patch doesn't seem to have been applied nor refused. So I'm
pinging to see if I need to change something? I already have a
copyright assignment now.
I'm attaching a updated patch that doesn't conflict in the Changelog
f
I've just noticed that tree-ssa-dse wrongly prints a new line to dump file.
For the next stage1, I'll go through usages of print_gimple_stmt and remove
extra new lines like:
gcc/auto-profile.c: print_gimple_stmt (dump_file, stmt, 0, TDF_SLIM);
gcc/auto-profile.c- fprintf (dump_file, "\n"
The libstdc++ part of the following patch
[fixincludes, v3] Don't define libstdc++-internal macros in Solaris 10+
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00330.html
has remained unreviewed for a week. Bruce already approved the
fixincludes part.
In the meantime, full tes
Hi,
As reported in PR78255 there is currently an issue with indirect sibling
calls in ARM when the address of the sibling call is loaded into 'r3'
and that same register is chosen to align the stack. See the report for
further information.
As I mentioned in the bugzilla ticket I am not sure this
Hi Dominique.
snip
> I have a last glitch (which can be deferred if needed):
snip
Fixed by the new patch, which is attached. Bootstraps and regtests OK.
OK for trunk?
Paul
2016-11-10 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/44265
* gfortran.h : Add fn_result_spec bitfield to gfc_symb
Hi all,
This patch implements the new separate shrink-wrapping hooks for aarch64.
In separate shrink wrapping (as I understand it) we consider each register
save/restore as
a 'component' that can be performed independently of the other save/restores in
the prologue/epilogue
and can be moved out
On 10 November 2016 at 09:34, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
>> On 9 November 2016 at 09:36, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 7 Nov 2016, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Richard,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>
On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
> On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has changed for
>> ARM with gcc-5.
>>
>> When r220674 was committed, default_binds_local_p_2 gained a new
>> parameter (weak_dominate),
Hi Andre,
> well, is it really that obvious?
well ... what can I say. If you wanna be strict about it, I guess
there is no such thing as an "obvious patch". There is basically
always something that you can miss, or that can be improved. Mikael's
patch was obvious to me in the sense that it is cle
The following fixes PR71762 via reverting the transforms of
~X & Y to X < Y and similar because when the bools they apply to
are expanded to RTL undefined values are not reliably zero-extended
and thus the transform is invalid. Ensuring the zero-extension
is too costly IMHO and the proper fix is
Kugan
Is there a PR for this failure? It broke bootstrap on AIX as well and
I only was able to track it to your patch last night.
Thanks, David
PING^2
On 10/31/2016 10:13 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> PING^1
>
> On 10/13/2016 05:34 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> As it's very hard to guess from GCC driver whether a target supports atomic
>> updates
>> for GCOV counter or not, I decided to come up with a new option value
>> (maybe-a
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:03 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> It's taken me longer than I expected to finally get back to this
> project. Sorry about the delay.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01110.html
>
> Attached is an updated patch with this enhancement and reflecting
> you previ
Hello.
Following patch fixes indentation of print_node when printing a constructor
that has some equal elements. Current implementation caches tree to prevent deep
debug outputs. Such behavior is undesired for ctor elements. Apart from that,
I switch to hash_set for a table that is used for tree n
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 09:36:09AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Currently, the way gengtype works it scans the list of source files
> with front end files at the end, and pushes data structures onto a
> stack. It then processes the stack in LIFO order, so that data
> structures from front ends ar
On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 18:12 +0200, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
> Currently, the DWARF description does not specify the signedness of the
> representation of enumeration types. This is a problem in some
> contexts where DWARF consumers need to determine if value X is greater
> than value Y.
>
> F
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>
> > Richard,
> >
> > Here is updated 3 patch.
> >
> > I checked that all new tests related to epilogue vectorization passed with
> > it.
> >
> > Your comments will be appreciated.
>
> A lot better now.
On Tue, 8 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Here is updated 3 patch.
>
> I checked that all new tests related to epilogue vectorization passed with it.
>
> Your comments will be appreciated.
A lot better now. Instead of the ->aux dance I now prefer to
pass the original loops loo
On Thu, 2016-11-03 at 18:39 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Adds Rust symbol demangler. Rust mangles symbols using GNU_V3 style,
> adding a hash and various special character subtitutions. This adds
> a new rust style to cplus_demangle and adds 3 helper functions
> rust_demangle, rust_demangle_sym an
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:42:51PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux and Rainer has kindly
> tested it on Solaris, ok for trunk?
>
> 2016-11-03 Jakub Jelinek
>
> * dwarf2out.c (size_of_discr_list): Fix typo in function comment.
>
>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:02:45PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> >From fb4b852a17656309e6acfb8da97cf9bce4b3b176 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: marxin
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:00 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] Create live_switch_vars conditionally (PR sanitizer/78270)
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
On 11/09/2016 10:02 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Using scan-assembler-times on the dwarf?
I always have a bad feeling about this kind of check as I imagine it can
break very easily with legit changes. But I have nothing better to
contribute, so I’ve added one such testcase. ;-)
Ok to commit?
Hi,
Please find the revised patch which includes the refurbishing of
mmpy-option option, and a new comment on DEFAULT_arc_fpu_build
define. As for the last suggestion, my proposal is to have a latter
patch on the topic of .cpu, synced with a related binutils patch.
OK to apply?
Claudiu
gcc/
2016
On 11/09/2016 02:47 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 02:29 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 02:16:45PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> As shown in the attached test-case, the assert cannot always be true.
>>> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regressi
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> This fixes a bug in code adding edges to the dependence graph. Values
> for this_dir can be -1 (backward edge), 0 (no edge), 1 (forward edge),
> and 2 (both backward and forward edges). There can be multiple
> dependencies checked, creating mult
The Fortran front-end patches. These were originally written by Cesar.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
2016-XX-XX Cesar Philippidis
fortran/
* openmp.c (resolve_oacc_positive_int_expr): Promote the warning
to an error.
(resolve_oacc_loop_blocks): Use integer zero to represen
Some additional tests and adjustments to existing ones were made.
2016-XX-XX Nathan Sidwell
Chung-Lin Tang
libgomp/
* testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/tile-1.c: New.
* testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/loop-auto-1.c: Adjust and
add additional
These are the patches for the C/C++ front-ends, along with the
testsuite patches.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
2016-XX-XX Nathan Sidwell
c/
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_clause_collapse): Disallow tile.
(c_parser_oacc_clause_tile): Disallow collapse. Fix parsing and
semantic
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo