From: Mike Frysinger
The P variable was deleted back in Nov 2015 (svn rev 231062),
but its expansion was missed. Delete those now too.
2017-07-18 Mike Frysinger
* gcc-interface/Makefile.in ($(P)): Delete
---
gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+
This is the second version of a patch for Aarc64 to add a vectorized mersenne
twister to libstdc++. The first version used intrinsics and included
"arm_neon.h". After feedback from the community this version uses only GCC
vector extensions and Aarch64 simd data types.
This patch adds an vectori
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 06:01:47AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 06:32:40AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> >> > PR80044 notes that -static and -pie together behave differently
Ping:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00411.html
On 07/08/2017 02:45 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
PR 81117 asks for improved detection of common misuses(*) of
strncpy and strncat. The attached patch is my solution. It
consists of three related sets of changes:
1) Adds a new option
Ping #2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00036.html
On 07/02/2017 02:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The attached patch enhances the -Wrestrict warning to detect more
than just trivial instances of overlapping copying by sprintf and
related functions.
The meat of the patch is relativ
On 07/17/2017 04:42 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 07/17/2017 05:27 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
>>> A minimum guard size of 64KB seems reasonable even on systems with
>>> 4KB pages. However whatever the chosen guard size, you cannot defend
>>> against hostile code. An OS can
Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/17/2017 05:27 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> > A minimum guard size of 64KB seems reasonable even on systems with
> > 4KB pages. However whatever the chosen guard size, you cannot defend
> > against hostile code. An OS can of course increase the guard size well
> > beyond
On 17 Jul, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-07-16 at 12:13 +0200, Volker Reichelt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is PING^4 for a C++ patch that adds fix-it hints for wrong usage
>> of 'friend' and 'auto':
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg01575.html
>
> I notice that the patch sli
2017-07-17 Uros Bizjak
* config/alpha/alpha.c: Include predict.h.
Bootstrapped on alphaev68-linux-gnu, committed to mainline SVN.
Uros.
Index: config/alpha/alpha.c
===
--- config/alpha/alpha.c(revision 250278)
+++ co
Hi
Here is the patch to fix libstdc++ versioned namespace.
Now versioned namespace is only at std and __gnu_cxx levels, not
anymore in nested namespaces.
PR libstdc++/81064
* include/bits/algorithmfwd.h: Reorganize versioned namespace.
* include/bits/basic_string.h: Likewi
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > +/* Combine successive multiplications. Similar to above, but handling
> > + overflow is different. */
> > +(simplify
> > + (mult (mult @0 INTEGER_CST@1) INTEGER_CST@2)
> > + (with {
> > + bool overflow_p;
> > + wide_int mul = wi::mul (@1, @2, TYP
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 09:51:40AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/16/2017 12:36 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> >>> On the other hand if probing is fast enough that it can be on by default
> >>> in gcc there should be much less of it. Even if you did change the ABI
> >>> to require probing it seems u
2017-07-17 22:10 GMT+02:00 François Dumont :
> Hi
>
> Here is the patch to implement the always equal alloc optimization for
> forward_list. With this version there is no abi issue.
>
> I also prefer to implement the _Fwd_list_node_base move operator for
> consistency with the move construc
Hi
Here is the patch to implement the always equal alloc optimization
for forward_list. With this version there is no abi issue.
I also prefer to implement the _Fwd_list_node_base move operator
for consistency with the move constructor and used it where applicable.
* include/bi
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017, Alexander Monakov wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Marc Glisse wrote:
X*big*big where abs(big*big)>abs(INT_MIN) can be optimized to 0
I'm not sure that would be a win, eliminating X prevents the compiler from
deducing that X must be zero (if overflow invokes undefined behavior
Hi!
I've bootstrapped/regtested and committed following 5 backports from
mainline to 7.x.
Jakub
2017-07-17 Jakub Jelinek
Backported from mainline
2017-06-30 Jakub Jelinek
PR target/81225
* config/i386/sse.md (vec_extract_lo_): For
V8FI, V16F
On 07/10/2017 05:27 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 07/07/2017 10:58 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
This patch is OK.
Thanks. Committed in r250104.
Do you have any comments on or concerns with changing how
LangEnabledBy interprets the opt argument as I suggest
Correct the problems Segher found in review and added a changes to deal
with the fallout from the __builtin_cpu_supports warning for older
distros.
Tested on P8 LE and P6/P7/P8 BE. No new tests failures.
./gcc/ChangeLog:
2017-07-17 Steven Munroe
* config.gcc (powerpc*-*-*): Add mmint
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Daniel Santos wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00025.html
>
> Uros,
> Can you review changes for i386 please?
x86 part is OK, so considering that Mike is OK with the Darwin part,
if there are no comments from Ian, the patch is OK for mainline
After a resent GCC change the previously submitted BMI/BMI2 intrinsic
test started to fail with the following warning/error.
ppc_cpu_supports_hw_available122373.c: In function 'main':
ppc_cpu_supports_hw_available122373.c:9:10: warning:
__builtin_cpu_supports need
s GLIBC (2.23 and newer) that exp
On 07/13/2017 04:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 07:44 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> I don't really see why this is so complicated, and why the rs6000
>> target changes (a later patch) are so big. Why isn't it just simple
>> patches to allocate_stack (and the prologue thing), that check
On 07/17/2017 10:28 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just some typos:
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 03:20:38PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> +/* If debugging dumps are requested, dump infomation about how the
>
> Typo ("information").
>
>> + target handled -fstack-check=clash for the prologu
Hi,
thanks for looking into this issue. It is quite weird indeed.
> Commenting out this bit makes the compilation succeed.
so my understanding is that RTL expansions confuses itself and redistributes
probabilities to two jumps while immediately optimizing out the second...
I think in such case i
On 07/06/2017 07:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
There are several hundred named attribute keys that have been
introduced over many GCC releases. Applications typically need
to be compilable with multiple GCC versions, so it is important
for developers to know when GCC introduced support for eac
While futzing around with ctor lookup I discovered this warning about
overly-private classes.
Originally we'd allow a public copy-ctor to be sufficiently public, but
as the comment says, you need an already-constructed object for that to
work. so this implements that check -- public copy or m
On Jul 17, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Daniel Santos wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00025.html
> Mike or Iain,
> Can one of you review changes for Darwin please?
Ok.
Hi,
Just some typos:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 03:20:38PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> +/* If debugging dumps are requested, dump infomation about how the
Typo ("information").
> + target handled -fstack-check=clash for the prologue.
> +
> + PROBES describes what if any probes were emitted.
> +
>
My bad, found an off-by-one error in the sizing of bitmaps. Please find fixed
patch in attachment.
ChangeLog entry is unchanged:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2017-06-13 Thomas Preud'homme
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_option_override): Forbid ARMv8-M Security
Extensions with more than 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00025.html
Uros,
Can you review changes for i386 please?
Mike or Iain,
Can one of you review changes for Darwin please? I'm not familiar with
the platform, although Rainer tested on Darwin for me.
Ian,
Can you review changes to libgcc please?
Th
We currently have separate 'has-move-assign' and 'has-move-ctor'
functions. but they are always called together. so lets just have a
single 'has-move-assign-or-move-ctor' function.
Applied to trunk.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
2017-07-17 Nathan Sidwell
* class.c (type_has_user_declared_mov
On Jul 17, 2017, at 12:22 AM, Yuri Gribov wrote:
>
> Currently mklog will fail to analyze lines like this in patches:
> diff -rupN gcc/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
> gcc-compare-checks/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
> (it fails with "Error: failed to parse diff for ... and ...").
>
> This patch
On 07/16/2017 12:36 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>> On the other hand if probing is fast enough that it can be on by default
>>> in gcc there should be much less of it. Even if you did change the ABI
>>> to require probing it seems unlikely that code violating that
>>> requirement would hit problem
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 09:24:27AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> While I'm not really comfortable with the 2k/2k split in general, I
> >> think I can support it from a Red Hat point of view -- largely because
> >> we use 64k pages in RHEL. So our guard is actually 64k. Having a
> >> hostile call ch
On 07/17/2017 05:27 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Jeff Law wrote:
>
>> So would a half-half (2k caller/2k callee) split like Florian has
>> proposed work for you? ie, we simply declare a caller that pushes the
>> stack pointer 2k or more into the guard as broken?
>
> My results show using a 4KB gu
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> this is to mitigate a race condition in expect 5.45-7
> (which will be fixed in 5.45-8) see this thread for details:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-07/msg00081.html
>
> By increasing the match buffer size from 2000 to 1
> bytes we
Hello,
attached patch fixes inconsistent handling of section flags when using
the section attribute, i.e.:
__attribute__((section("writable1"))) int foo1;
__attribute__((section("readonly1"))) const int foo1c;
__attribute__((section("writable2"))) int foo2 = 42;
__attribute__((section("readonly2")
Applied to the wwwdocs module.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: gcc-7/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.87
diff -u -r1.87 changes.html
--- gcc-7/changes.html 15 Jul 2017 16:51:18 -000
Hi,
this is to mitigate a race condition in expect 5.45-7
(which will be fixed in 5.45-8) see this thread for details:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-07/msg00081.html
By increasing the match buffer size from 2000 to 1
bytes we can avoid the fall-out due to the bug in expect,
while we have
Hello,
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Martin Liška wrote:
> which does all the stack preparation (including the problematic call to
> __asan_stack_malloc_N).
>
> Note that this code still should be placed before parm_birth_note as we
> cant's say that params are ready before a fake stack is prepared.
Y
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> So this isn't about global
>>
>> void *x[] = { &((struct Y *)0x12)->foo }
>>
>> but for a local one where supposedly variable indexing is valid (don't
>> we gimplify that)?
>
> Yes, it's local (it's OK if global because we do a full RTL ex
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 06:32:40AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>> > PR80044 notes that -static and -pie together behave differently when
>> > gcc is configured with --enable-default-pie as compare
> This seems fine, your description "does not always work." is a bit
> of a tease :) it would be nice to know _why_ it doesn't work, or at
> least a description of what problem you're seeing.
Committed with additional comments. Thank you,
Claudiu
> This looks fine, though the commit message tells me it's not a good
> idea, but it would be nice to know _why_ it's not good. Might be nice
> to know for future reference.
Committed with additional comments. Thank you,
Claudiu
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 06:32:40AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > PR80044 notes that -static and -pie together behave differently when
> > gcc is configured with --enable-default-pie as compared to configuring
> > without (or --disable-default-pie).
> The change looks fine, but it would be nice if the commit message
> explained _why_ we are default off for Linux and on for Elf, I think
> more text in the commit message on this sort of thing will help future
> developers understand why things are the way they are.
>
Committed with suggested a
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 08:22:56AM +0100, Yuri Gribov wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Currently mklog will fail to analyze lines like this in patches:
>> diff -rupN gcc/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
>> gcc-compare-checks/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
Thomas, thanks for the heads-up! I didn't realize we had this dependency.
I'll move the test case shortly.
-- Bill
> On Jul 17, 2017, at 5:47 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Is there a reason the new test is in gcc.dg rather than in gcc.dg/ubsan? The
> test FAILs when ther
On 07/14/2017 03:42 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>> Hopefully following patch will fix that. I returned to the first version
>> and saved/restored static_chain register before/after
>> __asan_stack_malloc.
>
> It should also work if you emit the
What is the next step now? Is anybody going to commit that patch?
Torsten
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 02:57:55PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 06/07/17 15:03, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> +#if TARGET_HAVE_NAMED_SECTIONS
No, this is a hook. You need to test targetm_common.have_named_s
On 17 July 2017 at 12:06, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> Hi Bin,
>>
>> On 30 June 2017 at 12:43, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On We
On 07/15/2017 09:37 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Patch removes some remaining references in gcc/ subfolder.
>>
>> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>
> You need to configure with --enable-languages=all for cleanups like this, the
> patch trivially breaks th
Jeff Law wrote:
> So would a half-half (2k caller/2k callee) split like Florian has
> proposed work for you? ie, we simply declare a caller that pushes the
> stack pointer 2k or more into the guard as broken?
My results show using a 4KB guard size is not ideal. 2KB of outgoing
args is too large
Hi,
this patch fixes PR81030, an P1 ICE in expand.
I.
For the test-case from the patch compiled at -O1 we have at .optimized:
...
_21 = 0;
_22 = c.5_6 != 0;
_23 = _21 | _22;
if (_23 != 0)
goto ; [73.27%] [count: INV]
else
goto ; [26.73%] [count: INV]
;;succ: 7 [73.3
> Looks like a good clean up.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
Committed, thank you for your review,
Claudiu
> So this isn't about global
>
> void *x[] = { &((struct Y *)0x12)->foo }
>
> but for a local one where supposedly variable indexing is valid (don't
> we gimplify that)?
Yes, it's local (it's OK if global because we do a full RTL expansion).
Everything is valid, constant and passes initializer_
> This all looks fine,
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
>
Committed. Thanks you for your review,
Claudiu
Hi Bill,
Is there a reason the new test is in gcc.dg rather than in gcc.dg/ubsan? The
test FAILs when there is no ubsan runtime support and fsanitize_undefined
effective target is not available in gcc.dg (one needs to load ubsan-dg for this
effective target to be defined).
Best regards,
Tho
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 08:22:56AM +0100, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently mklog will fail to analyze lines like this in patches:
> diff -rupN gcc/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
> gcc-compare-checks/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
> (it fails with "Error: failed to parse diff for ... and ...").
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> Apart from the MEM construction where I simply trust you this looks
>> ok. Mind adding MEM_REF support for this case as well?
>
> Do you mean MEM_REF ? Is that possible?
Yes.
>> Btw, why's simply output_constant_def (TREE_OPERAND (targe
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> PING PING
>
> Hi folks.
>
> The following is another iteration of the SSA range class, taking into
> account many of the suggestions posted on this thread, especially the
> addition of a memory efficient class for storage, folding non-zero
>
On Sun, 2017-07-16 at 12:13 +0200, Volker Reichelt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is PING^4 for a C++ patch that adds fix-it hints for wrong usage
> of 'friend' and 'auto':
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg01575.html
I notice that the patch slightly changes the apparent indentation
withi
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This is a followup patch for previous fix to PR81369. In that test case, GCC
> tries to distribute infinite loop, which doesn't make much sense. This patch
> works conservatively by skipping loops with unknown niters. It also
> simplifi
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This patch fixes ICE reported by PR81369. It simply sinks call to
> sort_partitions_by_post_order so that it's executed for all cases.
> This is necessary to schedule reduction partition as the last one.
> Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> _Fract types can't express 1, other spots that call build_one_cst already
> make sure that the type is integral or uses the !ALL_FRACT_MODE_P (TYPE_MODE
> (type))
> check I've added in this patch.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_6
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 30 June 2017 at 12:43, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Unlike most other expressions, BIT_INSERT_EXPR has an implicit
>>> operand of the precision/size of the second operand. This me
> What I said. looking at the contents of vxworks.h I see:
>
> #define CC1_SPEC\
> "%{tstrongarm:-mlittle-endian -mcpu=strongarm ; \
>t4:-mlittle-endian -march=armv4 ;\
>t4b
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 01:34:01PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> Although I said this was invalid code, it really isn't -- it's legal code.
>> It's more of an ice-on-stupid-code situation. :) So probably you should
>> remove the "in
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Franklin “Snaipe” Mathieu
wrote:
> From: Franklin “Snaipe” Mathieu
>
> Hello GCC folks,
>
> This patch series addresses PR 81135 [1].
>
> * patch 1/3 is for trunk (built/tested on trunk@250093).
> * patch 2/3 is the gcc7 backport (built/tested on gcc-7-branch@2496
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Robin Dapp wrote:
> The attached patch fixes PR81362.
>
> npeel was erroneously overwritten by vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost
> although the corresponding dataref is not used afterwards. It should be
> safe to get rid of the npeel parameter since we use the ret
On 16/07/17 10:21, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> The port is also *very* out-of-date. Not only does it not use the EABI,
>> but it hasn't had support for any core added since ARMv5 (and ARMv6 was
>> announced in 2002)!
>
> What do you mean exactly? The port works fine on ARMv7.
What I said. looking
https://gcc.gnu.org/r250264
Applied this patch which removes stuff dead since
https://gcc.gnu.org/r239246
Committed as obvious.
Johann
Remove stuff dead since r239246.
* config/avr/avr-arch.h (avr_inform_devices): Remove dead proto.
* config/avr/avr-devices.c (mcu_nam
> Hi all,
>
> This is a new version of previous patch
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00020.html), fixed
> after Rainer's remarks.
Hi,
the patch looks OK, but I wonder why you included can_be_discarded check?
If function is in comdat I believe the optimization still can happen.
Pe
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:15:40AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > I'm curious to see how many issues this is going to find in real-world
> > code out there!
>
> This is a bit anecdotal, but your code did find one real issue in Wine:
>
> https://
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > PR lto/80838 is about lto+profiledbootstrapped compiler being slower than
> > profiledboostrapped compiler.
> >
> > This is caused by a fact that some of object files linked into cc1plus
> > binary
> > are built with -fPIC and lto-w
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This patch fixes an ICE in new loop distribution code. When computing
> topological
> order for basic blocks it should record the max index of basic block, rather
> than
> number of basic blocks. I didn't add new test because existing t
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:18:02AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Following patch disables -fgnu-tm with AddressSanitizer.
> > Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
> >
> > Ready to be inst
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello
>
> Following patch disables -fgnu-tm with AddressSanitizer.
> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to be installed?
I think it should be a sorry () but no strong opinion.
Thanks,
Richar
https://gcc.gnu.org/r250263
This is a small clean-up that removed a dependency for a file
which no more exists (avr-tables.opt).
Committed as obvious.
Johann
* gcc_update (files_and_dependencies)
[gcc/config/avr/avr-tables.opt]: Remove dead entry.
Index: gcc_update
==
Hi All,
A typo in arm_neon.h is suggesting uses use -mfloat-abi=softp instead of softfp.
Committed as r25026 under the GCC obvious rule.
gcc/
2017-07-17 Tamar Christina
* config/arm/arm_neon.h: Fix softp typo.
Thanks,
Tamardiff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm_neon.h b/gcc/config/arm/arm_
Ping?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 12/07/17 09:59, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi Richard,
On 07/07/17 15:19, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Hmm, I think that's because really this is a partial conversion. It
looks like doing this properly would involve moving that existing code
to use sbitmaps a
Ping?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 12/07/17 14:31, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Coprocessor intrinsic tests in gcc.target/arm/acle test whether
__ARM_FEATURE_COPROC has the right bit defined before calling the
intrinsic. This allows to test both the correct setting of that macro
and the availability an
> Apart from the MEM construction where I simply trust you this looks
> ok. Mind adding MEM_REF support for this case as well?
Do you mean MEM_REF ? Is that possible?
> Btw, why's simply output_constant_def (TREE_OPERAND (target, 0), 1);
> not correct?
If you do that, you get a symbol in the c
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, for aggregate copies we fail to verify there
> are no loads in between the PHI and the aggregate copy that could alias with
> the
> lhs of the copy, which is needed, because we want to hoist the aggregate
> copy onto pre
[resend without HTML formatting]
On 14/07/17 16:29, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi Richard,
Hi,
I've committed the requested change as a separate patch to make it easier to
backport to earlier GCC versions
While looking into backporting r250206 I read the ARM C Language Extension
documentat
Hi,
Consider nvptx_single:
...
/* Single neutering according to MASK. FROM is the incoming block and
TO is the outgoing block. These may be the same block. Insert at
start of FROM:
if (tid.) goto end.
and insert before ending branch of TO (if there is such an insn):
end:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a follow-up on https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-07/msg00078.html
>
> compare_assert_loc in tree-vrp.c could return unpredictable results
> due to implicit conversion of unsigned subtraction to int here:
> return ha - hb;
>
> This could
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> PR lto/80838 is about lto+profiledbootstrapped compiler being slower than
> profiledboostrapped compiler.
>
> This is caused by a fact that some of object files linked into cc1plus binary
> are built with -fPIC and lto-wrapper then decides
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> I'm curious to see how many issues this is going to find in real-world
> code out there!
This is a bit anecdotal, but your code did find one real issue in Wine:
https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2017-July/163551.html
(and https://www.w
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this fixes the following ICE in decode_addr_const:
>
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 8.0.0 20170704 (experimental) [trunk revision 249942] (x86_64-suse-linux)
> GCC error:|
> | in deco
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, the following testcase started using recently
> BIT_FIELD_REFs instead of MEM_REFs and thus the bswap pass, while it
> properly determines the very long sequence of stmts is a nop transformation,
> throws that away and do
Hi all,
This is an updated version of patch in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00409.html . It prevents
optimization in presense of sNaNs (and qNaNs when comparison operator
is > >= < <=) to preserve FP exceptions.
Note that I had to use -fsignaling-nans in pr57371-5.c test because
Hi all,
I've rebased the previous patch to trunk per Andrew's suggestion.
Original patch description/motivation/questions are in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg01869.html
-Y
safe-unwind-2.patch
Description: Binary data
#include
#include
struct _Unwind_Context;
typedef int (*_
Hi,
Currently mklog will fail to analyze lines like this in patches:
diff -rupN gcc/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
gcc-compare-checks/gcc/testsuite/lib/profopt.exp
(it fails with "Error: failed to parse diff for ... and ...").
This patch fixes it. Ok for trunk?
-Y
mklog-filename-fix-1.patch
Des
Hi all,
This is a new version of previous patch
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00020.html), fixed
after Rainer's remarks.
-Y
pr56727-2.patch
Description: Binary data
95 matches
Mail list logo
