[PATCH] PR target/85456, Fix __builtin_powil for -mabi=ieeelongdouble on PowerPC

This patch adds __powikf2 to libgcc, and makes GCC use it for __builtin_powil when long double is IEEE 128-bit (-mabi=ieeelongdouble). I tested it on a little endian power8 system with a bootstrap compiler. There were no regresion failures. Can I check this into GCC 8? This does not need to be

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Pass --no-relax to linker if -mno-relax is present.

Hi Jim: Turned off both the assembler and the linker sounds good idea to me, but it's not support on current assembler now, and gcc might release in next few month, so I afraid we'll have a short time gap that is -mno-relax is broken due to assembler not support that command line option in the

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Pass --no-relax to linker if -mno-relax is present.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:10 AM, Kito Cheng wrote: > * config/riscv/elf.h (LINK_SPEC): Pass --no-relax if > -mno-relax is present. > * config/riscv/linux.h (LINK_SPEC): Ditto. It is easy enough to use -Wl,--no-relax and there are other linker options that

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Make sure stack is always aligned during adjusting

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:59 AM, Kito Cheng wrote: + HOST_WIDE_INT min_first_step = +RISCV_STACK_ALIGN (frame->total_size - frame->fp_sp_offset); + HOST_WIDE_INT max_first_step = +ROUND_DOWN (IMM_REACH / 2 - PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY / 8, +

Re: [PATCH] Fix (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst match.pd pattern (PR tree-optimization/85446)

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: As mentioned in the PR, this optimization can't work if @0's precision is higher than @1's precision, because originally it compares just some set of lower bits, but in the new comparison compares all bits. If @0's precision is smaller than @1's

Re: [PATCH] --enable-cet={yes,no,auto} with default no

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:24:15PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> So untested patch would be something like: >> > >> > Yes, this is what I think should be the most appropriate approach. > > Here is the patch with slightly

[PATCH] --enable-cet={yes,no,auto} with default no

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:24:15PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> So untested patch would be something like: > > > > Yes, this is what I think should be the most appropriate approach. Here is the patch with slightly tweaked install.texi and the all the regenerated bits too. Bootstrapped/regtested on

[PATCH] Fix (intptr_t) x eq/ne CST to x eq/ne (typeof x) cst match.pd pattern (PR tree-optimization/85446)

Hi! As mentioned in the PR, this optimization can't work if @0's precision is higher than @1's precision, because originally it compares just some set of lower bits, but in the new comparison compares all bits. If @0's precision is smaller than @1's precision (in this case @0 can't be a pointer,

Add myself to MAINTAINERS (write-after-approval)

2018-04-18 Paul A. Clarke * MAINTAINERS (write after approval): Add myself. Index: MAINTAINERS === --- MAINTAINERS (revision 259480) +++ MAINTAINERS (working copy) @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ Bin Cheng

[PATCH] Warn for ignored ASM labels on typdef declarations

Hello everyone! First, let me ask for your patience -- this is the first patch I am submitting to gcc. I tried very hard to follow the proper procedure, but I am sure that I've missed something. According to https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Asm-Labels.html#Asm-Labels asm labels have no effect

Re: [PATCH] Support bitfields in Wodr machinery (PR lto/85405).

Hi, On 17 April 2018 at 10:19, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On 04/17/2018 08:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:39:20AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: >> >> + if (DECL_BIT_FIELD (f1) != DECL_BIT_FIELD (f2)) >> >> +{ >> >> +

[PATCH] Make Wodr warnings stable.

Hi. This is small series that fixes 2 Wodr warnings issue that we have in bugzilla. It should make in stable across targets, I've tested x86_64, ppc64le and aarch64. Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and ppc64le-linux-gnu. It's pre-approved by Honza who worked on that with me. I'm going

Re: [PATCH] [PR c++/85437] accept static_casted ptrmem in constexpr

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:14:19PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:59:34PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:07:33AM +, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > I wonder if it would work to use CONVERT_EXPR for reinterpret_cast. > > As for reinterpret_cast,

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:32 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:04:50PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:57:41AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> > On Wed, Apr 18,

Re: PING: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR after __morestack call

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 8:55 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 7:00 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V > wrote: >>> -Original Message- >>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- >>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu

Re: [PATCH][i386] Adding MOVDIRI and MOVDIR64B instructions

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Peryt, Sebastian wrote: > Hi, > > This patch enables new instructions - MOVDIRI and MOVDIR64B. > > Is it ok for trunk? Is there a reason that one flag goes to ix86_isa_flags and the other to ix86_isa_flags2? Uros. > 2018-04-18

[GCC-9 PATCH, i386]: Emit inter-unit moves using preferred_for_speed infrastructure

Hello! Attached patch conditionally emits inter-unit moves using preferred_for_speed_infrastructure. Current approach, where registers are enabled only for TARGET_INTER_UNIT_MOVES_{FROM,TO}_VEC is not optimal, since for non-performance critical parts of the binary, we can still emit inter-unit

Re: [PATCH 2/5] [ARC] Fix FLS, SETI patterns.

* Claudiu Zissulescu [2018-04-06 11:00:11 +0200]: > From: claziss > > Claudiu Zissulescu > > * config/arc/arc.md ("vunspec"): Delete it, unify all the unspec > enums into a single definition. >

Re: ping [PATCH] Fix trunk failing to build for msp430-elf

The testsuite parts are OK with me, but the tree.c change needs separate approval...

Re: [PATCH 1/5] [ARC] Update sleep builtin.

* Claudiu Zissulescu [2018-04-06 11:00:10 +0200]: > From: claziss > > gcc/ > 2017-05-09 Claudiu Zissulescu > > * config/arc/arc-protos.h (check_if_valid_sleep_operand): Remove. > * config/arc/arc.c

Re: [PATCH] PR 83402 Fix ICE for vec_splat_s8, vec_splat_s16, vec_splat_s32 builtins

GCC Maintainers: I have addressed Segher's concerns regarding the range checking of the argument. The following is the updated patch. The regression testing for the patch was done on GCC mainline on      powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu (Power 8 LE) with no regressions.  Additional hand

Re: [PATCH] Fix UB in dbxout.c (PR debug/84637)

On 04/17/2018 02:54 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > The first hunk is I think rather obvious, -2147483648 should be printed > as -2147483648 and doesn't need to introduce UB in the compiler while doing > so. The changes to stabstr_D are analogous, but in addition to that I don't > see why we

Re: [PATCH] [Microblaze]: PIC Data Text Relative

On 04/18/2018 05:44 AM, Andrew Sadek wrote: Hello Michael, I have attached the patch as well, (the same as in : https://github.com/andrewsadek/microblaze-pic-data-text-rel/blob/pic_data_text_rel/PATCH_BUNDLE/gcc.patch) On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Andrew Sadek

ping [PATCH] Fix trunk failing to build for msp430-elf

ping x1 Trunk doesn't build for msp430 due to an ICE whilst building libstdc++. The following patch proposed a while ago fixes the issue, but hasn't been applied: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg01433.html I don't have write access, so if the patch is acceptable I would

Re: PING: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR after __morestack call

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 7:00 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- >> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu >> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:25 PM >> To: GCC Patches

Re: [RFC PATCHES] Obsolete or remove powerpc*-*-*spe* support (PR target/81084)

On 04/18/2018 01:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> In the http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-02/msg00041.html >> thread it has been proposed that powerpc*-*-*spe* would be obsoleted in >> GCC 7, which didn't happen and the rs6000 backend has been

Re: [PATCH] Fix UB in dse.c (PR rtl-optimization/85431)

On 04/17/2018 02:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As mentioned, for BLKmode stores with MEM_SIZE of 0 we invoke UB, > lowpart_bitmask (0) is called and that shifts an UHWI by 64. > Zero size MEMs should only appear in inline asm and shouldn't be interesting > to DSE at all, they can't make

RE: [PATCH 2/2] MIPS/GCC/testsuite: Fix data-sym-pool.c for n64 code

Maciej Rozycki writes: > (we have no support for hard-float n64 MIPS16 code generation), which > means that the test case will fail, as the regular expression pattern > expects `lw' and `.word' rather than `ld' and `.dword' respectively to > appear in assembly code

RE: [PATCH 1/2] MIPS/GCC/testsuite: Fix data-sym-pool.c for SVR4 model at -O0

Maciej Rozycki writes: > Given that the SVR4 vs PLT code model consideration is irrelevant for > this test case rather than rewriting the regular expression to match > this variant of code just enforce the PLT model by using the `-mplt' > option. It is safe to use this

Re: [PATCH] [PR c++/85437] accept static_casted ptrmem in constexpr

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:59:34PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:07:33AM +, Jason Merrill wrote: > > I wonder if it would work to use CONVERT_EXPR for reinterpret_cast. As for reinterpret_cast, we e.g. accept constexpr int a = reinterpret_cast (1); which clang++

RE: PING: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR after __morestack call

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:25 PM > To: GCC Patches ; Tsimbalist, Igor V > > Cc: Uros Bizjak

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:57:41AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > Here is a patch to add -mnop and use it with -fcf-protection. > >>> > >>> +mnop >

Re: [PATCH] [PR c++/85437] accept static_casted ptrmem in constexpr

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:07:33AM +, Jason Merrill wrote: > I wonder if it would work to use CONVERT_EXPR for reinterpret_cast. I have tried following (still need Alex' expr.c changes, otherwise it ICEs), on the bright side it fixes the new pr85437-4.C testcase, but it causes Excess errors:

Re: PING^4: [PATCH] Use dlsym to check if libdl is needed for plugin

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Apr 3, 2018, "H.J. Lu" wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 4:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 4:41 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed,

PING: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR after __morestack call

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 5:56 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Since __morestack will jump back to its callee via indirect call, we > need to insert ENDBR after calling __morestack. > > OK for trunk? > > H.J. > > gcc/ > > PR target/85388 > * config/i386/i386.c

PING: [PATCH] libgcc/CET: Add _CET_ENDBR to __stack_split_initialize

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:21 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > __stack_split_initialize () > at /export/gnu/import/git/sources/gcc/libgcc/config/i386/morestack.S:751 > 751 leaq-16000(%rsp),%rax # We should

PING: [PATCH] libgcc/CET: Skip signal frames when unwinding shadow stack

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:43 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 3:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> When -fcf-protection -mcet is used, I got >> >> FAIL: g++.dg/eh/sighandle.C >> >> (gdb) bt >> #0 _Unwind_RaiseException (exc=exc@entry=0x416ed0) >>

[PATCH][i386] Adding MOVDIRI and MOVDIR64B instructions

Hi, This patch enables new instructions - MOVDIRI and MOVDIR64B. Is it ok for trunk? 2018-04-18 Sebastian Peryt gcc/ * common/config/i386/i386-common.c (OPTION_MASK_ISA_MOVDIRI_SET, OPTION_MASK_ISA_MOVDIR64B_SET,

Re: [PATCH] [Microblaze]: PIC Data Text Relative

Hello Michael, I have attached the patch as well, (the same as in : https://github.com/andrewsadek/microblaze-pic-data-text-rel/blob/pic_data_text_rel/PATCH_BUNDLE/gcc.patch) On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Andrew Sadek wrote: > Hello Michael, > > I have adapted the

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:04:50PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:57:41AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> > > On Wed, Apr 18,

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 2:10 PM > To: H.J. Lu > Cc: Uros Bizjak ; Richard Biener >

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 1:39 PM > To: Richard Biener > Cc: Uros Bizjak ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist,

[wwwdocs] Add no_sanitize attribute

I would like to mention the attribute in GCC 8 changes. Martin Index: htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.67 diff -r1.67 changes.html 255a256,266 > > New

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/85442 fix duplicate debuginfo for cxx11-ios_failure.cc

The fix for PR 85222 ends up generating duplicate debuginfo sections, because we compile the .cc file and then compile the .s file. This adds -g0 to the second step so we don't generate debuginfo again. I've verified that we still have debuginfo for the file and can step through the code when

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:08 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>>

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:04:50PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:57:41AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > Here is a

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > Here is a patch to add -mnop and use it with -fcf-protection.

[PATCH] RISC-V: Make sure stack is always aligned during adjusting

Hi all: I've hit a bug when running gcc testsuite with gc trunk on our internal simulator, C extension may generate non-aligned stack in some program point. Verified with gcc testsuite on rv32imac/rv32ima elf. Fail case: riscv32-elf-gcc -march=rv32imac gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/graph

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Here is a patch to add -mnop and use it with -fcf-protection. >>> >>> +mnop >>> +Target Report Var(flag_nop) Init(0) >>> +Support multi-byte NOP

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:39 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> Here is a patch to add -mnop and use it with -fcf-protection. >> >> +mnop >> +Target Report Var(flag_nop) Init(0) >> +Support multi-byte NOP code generation. >> >> the option name is incredibly bad and the documentation

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:24 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:24 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Fix PR85261: ICE with FPSCR setter builtin

Hi Thomas, On 18/04/18 12:31, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi Kyrill, On 11/04/18 10:02, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Thomas, On 09/04/18 15:29, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi Ramana, On 06/04/18 17:17, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: > > > On 06/04/18 17:08, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> On 06/04/2018

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Fix PR85261: ICE with FPSCR setter builtin

Hi Kyrill, On 11/04/18 10:02, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Thomas, On 09/04/18 15:29, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi Ramana, On 06/04/18 17:17, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: > > > On 06/04/18 17:08, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> On 06/04/2018 16:54, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: >>> Instruction pattern for

Do not forget to register ODR types to odr type hash

Hi, this patch fixes misplaced conditional on TYPE_CANONICAL that makes odr_type_hash incomplete and thus we may miss some ODR warnings and/or diverge in devirtualization decisions. Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, also tested on libreoffice and firefox. Honza PR lto/85391

Re: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:59 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Lu, Hongjiu >> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:59 PM >> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak ; Tsimbalist, >> Igor V

Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/84442 if _Exit isn't declared then use _exit instead

Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk. commit f02b9c3a2b9ffe78613ba57e61a4f48413144218 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date: Wed Apr 18 12:15:16 2018 +0100 PR libstdc++/84442 if _Exit isn't declared then use _exit instead PR libstdc++/84442 *

[wwwdocs] Mention powerpc*-*-*spe* deprecation in gcc-8/changes.html

Hi! The following patch mentions the deprecation of powerpc*spe*. Ok for wwwdocs? Index: changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.66 diff -u -p -r1.66 changes.html ---

Re: [PATCH] Add ax_pthread.m4 for use in binutils-gdb

On 04/17/2018 11:10 PM, Joshua Watt wrote: > On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 22:50 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 04/17/2018 06:24 PM, Joshua Watt wrote: >>> Ping? I'd really like to get this in binutils, which apparently >>> requires getting it here first. >> >> I think it would help if you mentioned what

[PATCH] RISC-V: Pass --no-relax to linker if -mno-relax is present.

Hi all: Palmer has been added -mno-relax option before, I propose it should also pass to linker during link phase. ChangeLog: 2018-04-18 Kito Cheng * config/riscv/elf.h (LINK_SPEC): Pass --no-relax if -mno-relax is present. * config/riscv/linux.h

Re: [wwwdocs] Mention powerpc*-*-*spe* deprecation in gcc-8/changes.html

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > The following patch mentions the deprecation of powerpc*spe*. > Ok for wwwdocs? OK. > Index: changes.html > === > RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html,v >

[og7, openacc, libgomp, testsuite] Fix asserts in non-scalar-data.C

[ was: Re: [gomp4] fix c++ reference mappings in openacc ] On 01/21/2016 04:47 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: diff --git a/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c++/non-scalar-data.C b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c++/non-scalar-data.C new file mode 100644 index 000..180e86f --- /dev/null +++

RE: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:59 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak ; Tsimbalist, > Igor V > Subject: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet > > These tests must be

[og7, openacc, libgomp, testsuite] Fix asserts in firstprivate-int.{c,C}

[ was: Re: [gomp4] enable GOMP_MAP_FIRSTPRIVATE_INT in OpenACC ] On 01/27/2017 04:45 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: diff --git a/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c++/firstprivate-int.C b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c++/firstprivate-int.C + assert(i8o = i8i); + assert(i16o = i16i); +

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE with single element vector

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > I did run into an ICE with a single element vector triggered by > dividing the number of elements by 2 with exact_div here: > > tree-vect-data-refs.c:5132 > > else > { > /* If length is

Re: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet

On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > These tests must be compiled with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet. Required for correctness or just to make the dump scannings happy? In that case I'd prefer the more descriptive dg-skip-if > OK for trunk? > > H.J. > >

Re: [PATCH][AArch64/arm] PR testsuite/85326 Avoid C++ tests when C++ compiler not present

On 17/04/18 21:47, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 04:36:54PM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: This patch makes the arm and aarch64 testsuite safe for when a C++ compiler is not present. This involves moving .C files into g++.dg/other/ and guarding them with the appropriate target

Re: [RFC PATCHES] Obsolete or remove powerpc*-*-*spe* support (PR target/81084)

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > In the http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-02/msg00041.html > thread it has been proposed that powerpc*-*-*spe* would be obsoleted in > GCC 7, which didn't happen and the rs6000 backend has been split into two, > one actively maintained where the

Re: [PATCH] [PR c++/80290] recycle tinst garbage sooner

On Apr 18, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > Ok, thanks. Thanks, here's the consolidated patch I installed. tinst_level objects are created during template instantiation, and they're most often quite short-lived, but since there's no intervening garbage collection, they