incorrect to me as we seem to have here a use of
--with-build-sysroot without --with-sysroot.
Not sure if it's clear, but I'm wondering why this restriction in the
documentation ? Could we amend it ?
Cheers
Christian
On 08/29/2013 10:36 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hello Bill and Jakub
On 08
this is seems reasonable to push to trunk ?
Cheers
Christian
2012-12-21 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* configure.ac: Set target_header_dir for with-build-sysroot.
* configure: Regenerate.
Index: gcc/configure
Hello,
May I have a review from the DWARF, the ARM and RS6000 maintainers for
comments/approval ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01613.html
Needed to fix the powerpc-spe bootstrap referenced in bugzilla #57389
Many Thanks
Christian
Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com wrote
in
dwarf2cfi is fixed.)
- arm-none-eabi -with-fpu=neon-vfpv4
- powerpc-e500v2-linux-gnuspe
- x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu sanity build OK
Is dwarf-span-target-dbx.patch OK for trunk ?. More comments ?
Many Thanks,
Christian
2013-05-23 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR debug
, so the DBX conversion
information doesn't need to be duplicated.
Build and regtested with a arm-none-eabi newlib toolset configured with
--with-fpu=neon-vfpv4 --with-float=hard --with-arch=armv7-a
OK for trunk ?
Thanks
Christian
2013-05-22 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR debug
Yes, this looks good. OK for trunk, but please add a note about those
additional changes you made to the ChangeLog entry. Thanks!
Thanks, done with this entry:
2013-05-21 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* dwarf2out.c (multiple_reg_loc_descriptor): Use dbx_reg_number
case.
Does that seem OK with the attached patch ?
Thanks
Christian
-cary
2013-04-26 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* dwarf2out.c (multiple_reg_loc_descriptor): Use DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
for spanning registers.
Index: dwarf2out.c
from the respective arch maintainers
would be appreciated as I don't run the gdb testsuite on those targets.
Many thanks,
Christian
2013-04-26 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* dwarf2out.c (multiple_reg_loc_descriptor): Use DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
for spaning registers.
2013-04-26
Hello,
This patches set the correct operand mode for tstsi_t_zero_extract_eq,
to avoid reload generating a move between a constant and a void register.
Reg tested for sh-elf. No performance impact
OK for 4.7, 4.8 and trunk ?
Thanks
2013-04-26 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR
Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR target/56995
* gcc.target/sh/mfmovd.c: Add new function and check hard_float.
2013-04-18 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR target/56995
* config/sh/sh.h (enum reg_class): Remove DF_HI_REGS.
(REG_CLASS_NAMES): Idem.
(REG_CLASS_CONTENTS): Idem
by allowing
the sh-elf build to complete.
Thanks,
Christian
2013-04-09 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/sh.md (barrier_align): Use next/prev_active_insn instead
of next/prev_real_insn.
Index: gcc/config/sh/sh.c
a dump_table when necessary.
The example from the documentation now compiles fine. Added it to the
regression tests. OK for trunk ?
ps: Added again the original ChangeLog entry for the missing .md part.
Thanks,
Christian
2013-01-12 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/sh.c
On 12/18/2012 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 03:41:58PM +0100, Christian Bruel wrote:
Canadian Cross Builds fail to build libgcc/unwind-dw2.c
...
../../../../libgcc/unwind-dw2.c:42:21: fatal error: sys/sdt.h: No such
file or directory
...
when the build machine
Hi Kaz,
Now that the cross-jumping problem is fixed since rev #193350, I'd like
to remove this restriction and close PR/54546.
Checked with default sh-sim target_board and
--target_board=sh-sim/-freorder-blocks-and-partition.
Thanks
Christian
2012-11-09 Christian Bruel christian.br
any difference on x86.
This also solves a few Invalid sum of incoming frequencies messages
while dumping the CFG
Reg-tested on x85 and sh-superh-elf. Is it OK for the 4.7 and 4.8 branches ?
Thanks
Christian
2012-11-07 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* tree-ssa-tail-merge.c
OK,
is bb1 going to die? If not, probably bb1-count = 0 should be there, if so,
then the bb1-frequency = 0 is redundant.
Agree, we do 'delete_basic_block (bb1)' and the frequency is not used in
between, so the setting to 0 seems unnecessary.
testing it:
Index: tree-ssa-tail-merge.c
1) fixes the problem, so 5 and 4 are now in the same partition. The fix
is quite trivial, as with attached.
That looks obviously correct to me. I can't approve it, but I'd have
committed it as obvious.
Thanks, I'll make the formal request, after checking forthe unexpected
side effects
are decent.
Checked with all assertions this time, Candidate for trunk.
Many thanks
Christian
On 09/11/2012 03:05 AM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com wrote:
This patch implements the simple_return pattern to enable -fshrink-wrap
on SH. It also clean up some redundancies
Hello,
This patch fixes a couple of assertions while building libgcc, when
configured with --enable-checking=all.
OK for trunk ?
thanks
Christian
2012-09-13 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/predicates.md (t_reg_operand): Check REG_P for SUBREG.
* config/sh/sh.c
?
thanks,
Christian
On 09/11/2012 06:21 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:40:30PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
wrote:
Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) - BB10
On 09/11/2012 12:28 AM, Oleg Endo wrote:
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 15:51 +0200, Christian Bruel wrote:
This patch implements the simple_return pattern to enable -fshrink-wrap
on SH. It also clean up some redundancies for expand_epilogue (called
twice from the return and epilogue patterns
On 09/11/2012 03:05 AM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com wrote:
This patch implements the simple_return pattern to enable -fshrink-wrap
on SH. It also clean up some redundancies for expand_epilogue (called
twice from the return and epilogue patterns
Hi Kaz,
Any news for my sh-superh-elf --with-newlib patch ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00137.html
Thanks
Christian
Hello,
While testing the patch to enable shrink-wrapping on SH [PR54546], we
hit an the error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary
Indeed, shrink-wrap duplicates a bb with successors (containing the
return sequence) into an unlikely section. I first thought about setting
the
Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) - BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) - EXIT
and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are duplicating it.
My hypothesis, is that with a gcov based profile, we should never have
such partitioning on the edges, BB10 should be COLD as
On 09/11/2012 05:40 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
wrote:
Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) - BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) - EXIT
and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are duplicating
or not, just want to share
that in case someone as an input on this.
Cheers
Christian
On 09/11/2012 05:40 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
wrote:
Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) - BB10
.
Thanks
Christian
2012-08-29 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/sh-protos.h (sh_need_epilogue): Delete.
* config/sh/sh.c (sh_need_epilogue): Delete.
(sh_need_epilogue_known): Delete.
(sh_output_function_epilogue): Remove sh_need_epilogue_known.
* config/sh/sh.md (any_return
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg01164.html), in case this
macro is removed in the future.
Thanks
Christian
2012-09-04 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/newlib.h (NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C): Define.
Index: config/sh/newlib.h
Hi Oleg,
Your movhi_index_disp and movsi_index_disp split patterns match several
times with the same bodies and names. I suppose it is a merge glitch
during your commit ?
Cheers
Christian
= NULL_RTX;
Turns out that JUMP_LABEL was not set after gen_return in
sh.c:gen_far_branch.
This patch fixes this. Tested for sh4-linux
OK for 4.7 and trunk ?
thanks
Christian
2012-07-19 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* config/sh/sh.c (gen_far_branch): Set JUMP_LABEL for return jumps
On 07/19/2012 11:14 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Christian Bruel
christian.br...@st.com wrote:
This is a SH regression on the 4.7 and trunk while building Webkit
(pre-processed file size is about 2.2Mb :-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction
On 07/19/2012 12:35 PM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com wrote:
This is a SH regression on the 4.7 and trunk while building Webkit
(pre-processed file size is about 2.2Mb :-)
A far branch to a return rtx produces an ICE in
find_dead_or_set_registers at line
On 05/28/2012 06:27 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 05/28/2012 01:11 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
I shared the same concern, however, after playing bits with spec toys, I
couldn't a find a way to get
On 05/29/2012 12:50 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
The existing rule is supposed to be: options are only accepted if in
*both* a .opt file *and* a spec. If not in a .opt file, the common
machinery will reject them; if in a .opt file but not a spec
===
--- gcc/ChangeLog (revision 187927)
+++ gcc/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,20 @@
+ .mine
+2012-05-18 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
+
+ * gcc.c (save_switch) Add user_p parameter. Set live_cond.
+ (read_specs
Hello
On 05/22/2012 03:52 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
1) Lazily check the flag validation until all command line spec files
are read. For this purpose, 'read_specs' records specs, to be analyzed
with 'file_spec_p'. Such flags have 'live_cond
On 05/28/2012 01:11 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
I shared the same concern, however, after playing bits with spec toys, I
couldn't a find a way to get a % switch recognition failure, since the
switches passed on the command line at this point
in a
spec file.
Thanks a lot for your feedback. I'd like to candidate this change for
the 4.7 and trunk branches.
Christian
2012-05-18 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* gcc.c (save_switch) Add user_p parameter. Set live_cond.
(read_specs): Likewise. Call record_file_spec.
(main): Call
On 04/18/2012 11:51 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 April 2012 10:29, Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com wrote:
Is it OK for trunk, bootstrapped and regtested on x86
I think Joseph Myers
to reflect the new
warn_if_unused_value location (moved from stmt.c to c-familly/c-common.c).
Is it OK for trunk, bootstrapped and regtested on x86
Many Thanks
Christian
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2010-02-15 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* gcc.dg/case-const-1.c: Test constant expression
): Skip NOP_EXPR.
* convert.c (convert_to_integer): Don't set TREE_NO_WARNING.
2010-03-29 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR c/52283
* gcc.dg/case-const-1.c: Test constant expression.
* gcc.dg/case-const-2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/case-const-3.c: Likewise.
2012-03-29 Manuel López
On 04/04/2012 11:38 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
Hi Christian,
You have to add the testcases from both PR52283 and PR37985, and an
appropriate Changelog, and bootstrap+regression test everything and
double-check that the new testcases don't fail and no old testcases
fail with the patch (by
On 02/15/2012 06:03 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
Removal of this NOP_EXPR if !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P fixes the problem.
looks safe from my testing, because the loc is inserted using
'protected_set_expr_location', whereas no loc for a constant case
On 02/15/2012 06:03 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
Removal of this NOP_EXPR if !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P fixes the problem.
looks safe from my testing, because the loc is inserted using
'protected_set_expr_location', whereas no loc for a constant case
that
is not valid ISO C but you would like to be accepted unless -pedantic, by
analogy with other such code that is accepted.
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Christian Bruel wrote:
What I'm unsure is why we couldn't have a TREE_NO_WARNING on a
!CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P. This seems necessary on some cases
in the attached testsuite part,
The test now compiles and generates the expected error with -pedantic or
-pedantic-error
Bootstrapped/Regression tested on x86
Thanks for any comment, and if OK to go for 4.6 and trunk
Many thanks
Christian
2010-02-15 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
$srcdir/$subdir/bprob-*.c]] {
-
2011-08-29 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* gcc.misc-tests/bprob.exp (feedback_options): Set
-fbranch-probabilities.
-
Thanks
Christian
Honza
Many thanks
Christian
Hello,
Could I have a review for the trivial patch posted in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01123.html
-fprofile-use sets flag_branch_probabilities.
But we should also be able to use -fbranch-probabilities on its own
using the information generated by -fprofile-arcs, as
not found, execution counts estimated.
This trivial patch fixes it. testsuite ok.
OK ?
Christian
2011-08-12 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
* coverage.c (coverage_init): Check flag_branch_probabilities instead of
flag_profile_use.
Index: gcc/coverage.c
On 06/20/2011 03:41 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com writes:
2011-06-16 Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com
PR 49139/43654
Please use the correct PR number format here:
PR middle-end/49139
PR middle-end/43654
Otherwise the
On 06/08/2011 11:11 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com wrote:
Hello Richard,
On 06/06/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com
wrote:
OK, the only
OK, the only difference is that we don't have the node analyzed here, so
externally_visible, etc are not set. With the initial proposal the warning
was emitted only if the function could not be inlined. Now it will be
emitted for each DECL_COMDAT (decl) !DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P (decl)) even
On 06/01/2011 12:02 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com wrote:
On 05/31/2011 11:18 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Christian Bruelchristian.br...@st.com
wrote:
Hello,
The attached patch fixes
be warned anyway. Or maybe a new
-Winline-always that would be activated under -Wall ? Other opinion
welcomed.
Tested with standard bootstrap and regression on x86.
Comments, and/or OK for trunk ?
Many thanks,
Christian
2010-05-25 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR 49139
of indirect calls which can be treated separately).
Cheers
Christian
2010-05-25 Christian Bruel christian.br...@st.com
PR 49139
* cgraph.c (cgraph_function_body_availability): Check always_inline
* ipa-inline-transform.c (inline_transform): Force optimize_inline_calls
101 - 156 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
