Re: 0005-Part-5.-Add-x86-CET-documentation

On 09/20/2017 08:13 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: Uros, could you please review this patch as it's a part of x86 specific changes you have reviewed already. Please proofread and spell-check the text. There are

Re: 0002-Part-2.-Document-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

On 09/19/2017 07:45 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: Here is an updated patch (version #2). Mainly attribute and option names were changed. gcc/doc/ * extend.texi: Add 'nocf_check' documentation. * gimple.texi: Add second parameter to gimple_build_call_from_tree. *

Re: [patch, fortran] Warn about out-of-bounds access with DO subscripts

On 09/23/2017 05:33 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > Hello world, > > here is an update and a ping for my patch at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-09/msg01104.html > > This patch warns unconditionally for > >   REAL A(3) >   DO I=1,4 > A(I) = 42. >   END DO > > while only warning

correct attribute ifunc C++ type safety (PR 82301)

r253041 enhanced type checking for alias and ifunc attributes to detect declarations of incompatible aliases, or ifunc resolvers that return pointers to functions of an incompatible type. More extensive testing exposed a bug in the implementation of the ifunc attribute handling in C++ where the

Re: [PATCH] PR target/80556

On Sep 22, 2017, at 2:55 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: > >> On 18 Sep 2017, at 22:08, Simon Wright wrote: >> >> On 18 Sep 2017, at 21:09, Iain Sandoe wrote: >>> > If I propose this alternative patch, should it be a new post, or

[fortran, test case, committed]

Hello world, this seems to be a productive day for gfortran :-) Here is another commit of a test case for a bug that was fixed some time ago. This is r253126. Regards Thomas 2017-09-24 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/66328 *

[PATCH gfortran] PR 61450: ICE in gfc_global_used()

Rebased FX’s patch. Tested on x86_64-apple-darwin16.Is it OK with the proper log entries added? TIA Dominique diff -up ../_clean/gcc/fortran/parse.c gcc/fortran/parse.c --- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/parse.c 2017-01-22 20:50:56.0 +0100 +++ gcc/fortran/parse.c 2017-01-24

[test cases, fortran, committed] Test cases for PR 54633

Hi, I have committed the test cases below for the PR, which have been fixed by an unknown commit, to make sure that no regression occurs. Since the main part of the PR is fixed, but there is one more unrelated test case, I will close this one and open a new one (following Dominique's suggestion

[patch, fortran, committed] Fix PR 79612

Patch committed after approval by Thomas Koenig on IRC Dominique

Re: [PATCH] x32: Encode %esp as %rsp to avoid 0x67 prefix

On 9/24/17, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:16 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Since the upper 32 bits of stack register are always zero for x32, we >> can encode %esp as %rsp to avoid 0x67 prefix in address if there is no >> index or base register.

Re: [PATCH] x32: Encode %esp as %rsp to avoid 0x67 prefix

On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:16 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Since the upper 32 bits of stack register are always zero for x32, we > can encode %esp as %rsp to avoid 0x67 prefix in address if there is no > index or base register. > > Tested on x86-64. OK for trunk? > > H.J. > >

[patch, fortran, committed] Fix PR 80118

Hello world, Steve had analyzed the bug and provided a patch in the PR; I modified the patch stylistically and committed it as obvious after regression-testing (r253123). Thanks Steve! Since this is a regression, I will backport soon. Regards Thomas 2017-09-24 Thomas Koenig