In vectorizable_nonlinear_induction, r13-2503-gc13223b790bbc5 prevent variable
peeling by
only checking LOOP_VINFO_MASK_SKIP_NITERS (loop_vinfo). But when
"!vect_use_loop_mask_for_alignment_p (loop_vinfo) &&
LOOP_VINFO_PEELING_FOR_ALIGNMENT (loop_vinfo) < 0", vectorizer will
still do variable
On Linux/x86_64,
5d84a4418aa962a715dc74998fea2a7de9d4042c is the first bad commit
commit 5d84a4418aa962a715dc74998fea2a7de9d4042c
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Tue Sep 13 11:18:14 2022 -0400
libstdc++: Implement ranges::chunk_view from P2442R1
caused
FAIL:
Suwa-san, could you please take a look?
This change fixes the fowllowing testsuite failures when building for
call0 ABI:
g++.dg/ipa/pr60640-4.C
g++.dg/ipa/pr83549.C
g++.dg/ipa/pr83667.C
g++.dg/torture/pr81812.C
gcc/
* config/xtensa/xtensa.cc (xtensa_can_output_mi_thunk)
This patch changes the representation of OMP array sections in the
C++ front end to use the new OMP_ARRAY_SECTION tree code instead of a
TREE_LIST. This is important for "declare mapper" support, because the
array section representation may stick around longer (in "declare mapper"
definitions),
This patch implements OpenMP 5.0 "declare mapper" support for C++.
This hasn't been fully revised yet following previous review comments,
but I am including it in this series to demonstrate the new approach to
gimplifying map clauses after "declare mapper" instantiation.
The
This patch was previously posted as part of the series supporting
"declare mapper" for Fortran, here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596041.html
Implementing the "omp declare mapper" functionality, I noticed some
cases where handling of derived type members that are
This patch changes parsing for OpenMP map clauses in C++ to use the
generic expression parser, hence adds support for parsing general
lvalues (as required by OpenMP 5.0+).
This patch hasn't been fully revised following previous review comments
yet, but I'm including it in support of the following
This patch trivially adds braces and reindents the
OMP_CLAUSE_TO/OMP_CLAUSE_FROM/OMP_CLAUSE__CACHE_ stanza in
c_finish_omp_clause and finish_omp_clause, in preparation for the
following patch (to clarify the diff a little).
2022-09-13 Julian Brown
gcc/c/
* c-typeck.cc
This patch moves GOMP_MAP_ATTACH{_ZERO_LENGTH_ARRAY_SECTION} nodes to
the end of the clause list, for offload regions. This ensures that when
we do the attach operation, both the "attachment point" and the target
region have both already been mapped on the target. This avoids a
pathological case
This patch adjusts OpenMP/OpenACC clause list handling in a couple of
places, in preparation for the following mapping-clause expansion rework
patch. Firstly mapping groups are removed as a whole in the C and C++
front-ends when an error is detected, which avoids leaving "badly-formed"
mapping
This patch refactors struct sibling-list processing in gimplify.cc, and
adjusts some related mapping-clause processing in the Fortran FE and
omp-low.cc accordingly. This version addresses some previous review
comments, mostly with regards to the naming of local helper functions.
(Previous
This patch reimplements the omp_target_reorder_clauses function in
anticipation of supporting "deeper" struct mappings (that is, with
several structure dereference operators, or similar).
The idea is that in place of the (possibly quadratic) algorithm in
omp_target_reorder_clauses that greedily
This patch has been split out from the previous one to avoid a
confusingly-interleaved diff. The two patches will be committed squashed
together.
2022-09-13 Julian Brown
gcc/
* gimplify.c (omp_target_reorder_clauses): Delete.
---
gcc/gimplify.cc | 205
This is a new version of the first few patches of the series (up to
"Handle reference-typed struct members"):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591973.html
Relative to the previously-posted series, this version addresses
several review comments, but more significantly it
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:20 AM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> This libgo patch makes runtime.Version return a meaningful string.
> This also means that "go version" will print something useful, e.g.,
>
> go version go1.18 gccgo (GCC) 12.0.1 20220216 (experimental) linux/amd64
>
> This fixes
This patch tweaks the match.pd transformation previously added to fold
(X<
gcc/ChangeLog
* match.pd (op (lshift @0 @1) (lshift @2 @1)): Optimize the
expression (X
This patch is the second part of a fix for PR tree-optimization/71343,
that implements Richard Biener's suggestion of using tree-ssa's value
numbering instead of match.pd. The change is that when assigning a
value number for the expression X<
gcc/ChangeLog
PR tree-optimization/71343
On Mon, 12 Sep 2022, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > We don't claim in glibc to support old snapshots from master, so checking
> > for __GNUC_PREREQ (13, 0) and failing for such older GCC 13 versions is
> > fine.
>
> Ok, makes sense, especially if it is applied on the glibc side a few
On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 6:40 PM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> This libgo patch ignores the __morestack function in runtime.Callers.
> We were ignoring all functions starting with "__morestack_", but not
> the function "__morestack" itself. Without this change, some tests
> such as recover.go
Hi!
While icv_addr[1] = false; assignments where icv_addr has void *
element type is correct and matches how it is used (in those cases
the void * pointer is then cast to bool and used that way), there is no
reason not to add explicit (void *) casts there which are there already
for (void *)
Hi!
The following patch attempts to implement C++23 P1169R4 - static operator()
paper's compiler side (there is some small library side too not implemented
yet). This allows static members as user operator() declarations and
static specifier on lambdas without lambda capture. As decl specifier
Static PIE allows us to extend the ASLR to cover static executables and
it's not too difficult to support it. On GCC side, we just pass a group
of options to the linker, like other ports with static PIE support.
The real implementation of static PIE (rcrt1.o) will be added into Glibc
later.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed to trunk as obvious.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* cp-tree.h (mark_used): Remove single-parameter overload. Add
default argument to the two-parameter overload.
* decl2.cc (mark_used): Likewise.
---
gcc/cp/cp-tree.h | 4 ++--
On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 09:17:09PM +0800, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> On 2022/6/28 10:06 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 11:47:59PM +0800, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> > > with the way that chunk_size < 1 is handled for gomp_iter_dynamic_next:
> > >
> > > (1) chunk_size <= -1: wraps
On 9/13/22 09:46, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2022, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/13/22 07:45, Patrick Palka wrote:
It looks like we aren't respecting SFINAE for:
* an invalid/non-constant conditional explicit-specifier
* a non-constant conditional noexcept-specifier
* a
On Tue, 13 Sep 2022, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 9/13/22 07:45, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > It looks like we aren't respecting SFINAE for:
> >
> >* an invalid/non-constant conditional explicit-specifier
> >* a non-constant conditional noexcept-specifier
> >* a non-constant argument to
On 9/13/22 07:45, Patrick Palka wrote:
It looks like we aren't respecting SFINAE for:
* an invalid/non-constant conditional explicit-specifier
* a non-constant conditional noexcept-specifier
* a non-constant argument to __integer_pack
This patch fixes these issues in the usual way, by
It looks like we aren't respecting SFINAE for:
* an invalid/non-constant conditional explicit-specifier
* a non-constant conditional noexcept-specifier
* a non-constant argument to __integer_pack
This patch fixes these issues in the usual way, by passing complain
and propagating
On 13/09/2022 12:03, Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Hello,
This patch intends to backport e90af965e5c by Jakub Jelinek to
devel/omp/gcc-12.
The original patch was described here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601189.html
I've merged and committed it for you.
Andrew
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 8:00 PM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa
wrote:
> On 2022/09/13 4:34, Max Filippov wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 1:50 PM Takayuki 'January June' Suwa
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> This patch implements new target hook TARGET_CONSTANT_OK_FOR_CPROP_P in
> >> order to exclude
On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 17:48, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> This also implements the LWG 3711 and 3712 changes to slide_view.
OK, thanks.
On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 17:48, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> This also implements the LWG 3707, 3710 and 3712 changes to chunk_view.
> +
> + template
> +requires input_range<_Vp>
> + class chunk_view<_Vp>::_OuterIter
> + {
> +chunk_view* _M_parent;
> +
> +constexpr
Hello,
This patch intends to backport e90af965e5c by Jakub Jelinek to
devel/omp/gcc-12.
The original patch was described here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601189.html
Thanks,
--
Paul-Antoine ArrasFrom c1fb6ff897d0b929807d52cf52d4894e252e7d96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 17:46, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for trunk only?
I briefly wondered whether we could just use a union there and provide
the special members to init/copy/destroy it properly, but we already
use in so it's
On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 18:40, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> I noticed compiling e.g. std/ranges/adaptors/join.cc with
> -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG -Wsystem-headers -Wall gives the warning:
>
> gcc/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_iterator.h:477:9: warning: suggest
> parentheses around ‘&&’
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:57 AM Roger Sayle wrote:
>
>
> This patch resolves PR target/106877 an ICE-on-invalid inline-asm
> regression. An innocent upstream change means that the test case
> from PR inline-asm/84683 now hits a different assert in reg-stack.cc's
> move_for_stack_reg. Fixed by
This patch resolves PR target/106877 an ICE-on-invalid inline-asm
regression. An innocent upstream change means that the test case
from PR inline-asm/84683 now hits a different assert in reg-stack.cc's
move_for_stack_reg. Fixed by duplicating Jakub's solution to PR 84683
From: Jiawei
Add -m[no]-csr-check option in gcc part, when enable -mcsr-check option,
it will add csr-check in .option section and pass this to assembler.
V2: Add assembler support check info for -mcsr-check. Thanks for Kito's
suggestions.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config.in: New def.
The following makes sure to clear the CTRL altering flag when
folding emits a __builitin_unreachable in place of a virtual call
which now might become a trap.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed.
PR middle-end/106909
* gimple-fold.cc (gimple_fold_call):
The following avoids setting and not clearing an auto_bb_flag
on EXIT_BLOCK which we don't verify for such stale flags but
dump_bb_info still asserts on them.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed.
PR tree-optimization/106913
* tree-ssa-uninit.cc
This patch fixes various issues around the handling of vectors
and (particularly) vector structures with +nosimd. Previously,
passing and returning structures would trigger an ICE, since:
* we didn't allow the structure modes to be stored in FPRs
* we didn't provide +nosimd move patterns
*
The ls64-related move expanders and splits required TARGET_SIMD.
That isn't necessary, since the 64-byte values are stored entirely
in GPRs. (The associated define_insn was already correct.)
I wondered about moving the patterns to aarch64.md, but it wasn't
clear-cut.
Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu
Hi Richard,
Thanks you so much for reviewing this patch. I really appreciate it. For these
review comments, I have made some changes.
> That's a single-stmt match, you shouldn't use match.pd matching for this.
> Instead just do
>
> if (is_gimple_assign (stmt)
> && ((code =
Placed the reverse-offload -march=sm_30 vs. >=sm_35 remark accidentally
to the 'gcn' section. The surrounding wording it very similar, hence, I
did not spot it.
Committed as r13-2636.
Tobias
-
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634
Hi
> On 13 Sep 2022, at 03:34, HAO CHEN GUI via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> On 7/9/2022 上午 1:19, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> make -k -j60 check
>> RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix'{-m64,-m32,-m32/-mpowerpc64}'"
>>
>> It is fine to not test -m32/-mpowerpc64 so often, and certaionly not
>>
@Alexander/@Tom – Can you comment on both libgomp/config/nvptx +
libgomp/plugin/plugin-nvptx.c ? (Comments on the rest are welcome, too)
(Updated patch enclosed)
Because Jakub asked:
I'm afraid you need Alexander or Tom here, I don't feel I can review it;
I could rubber stamp it if they are
46 matches
Mail list logo
