Re: [PATCH] libgomp, testsuite: Do not call nonstandard functions on darwin

Revised patch. I does the job on darwin, can you check that it still tests the functions on Linux? And if so, OK to commit? FX 0001-Testsuite-DWARF2-adjust-regexp-to-match-darwin-outpu.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] libgomp, testsuite: Do not call nonstandard functions on darwin

> Revised patch. I does the job on darwin, can you check that it still tests > the functions on Linux? > And if so, OK to commit? With the correct file, sorry. 0001-libgomp-testsuite-Do-not-call-nonstandard-functions.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] Testsuite, DWARF2: adjust regexp to match darwin output

es > optional > > I chose the second approach. It makes the test pass on darwin. If someone can > test it on linux, it’d be appreciated :) I don’t have ready access to such a > system right now. > > Once that passes, OK to commit? > FX > 0001-Testsuite-DWARF2-adjust-regexp-to-match-darwin-outpu.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Analyzer failure due to missing header

> std::max and std::min, introduced by d99d73c77d1e and 2bad0eeb5573, are not > available because is not included. I originally thought this was only seen in cross-compilers, but it actually broke bootstrap on darwin. Attached patch restores it, OK to commit? FX 0001-Analyzer-i

[PATCH] Darwin: homogenize spelling of macOS

their name, it was kept. - All uses referring to powerpc*-apple-darwin* were kept as-is, because those versions all predate the change to “macOS”. - I did not touch Ada or D - I did not touch testsuite comments Tested by building on x86_64-apple-darwin, and generating the docs. OK to push? FX

Re: [PATCH] Darwin: homogenize spelling of macOS

Hi, Thanks Sandra and Iain. Patch pushed. FX

Re: Testsuite: fix contructor priority test

Hi, I was about to ping the attached patch, and realised it bordered on obvious, so I pushed it directly. FX > Le 19 août 2023 à 22:40, FX Coudert a écrit : > > Bordering on obvious, tested on darwin where the test case fails before (and > now passes). > > OK to commi

[PATCH] Add __builtin_iseqsig()

is now done systematically. Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu OK to commit? FX 0001-Add-__builtin_iseqsig.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

o kind=17 mention in them anywhere. Actually, where is the kind=17 documented? FX

[PATCH] Fortran: add IEEE_QUIET_* and IEEE_SIGNALING_* comparisons

(), which I posted for review at: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/620801.html Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, OK to commit (once the middle-end patch is accepted)? FX 0002-Fortran-add-IEEE_QUIET_-and-IEEE_SIGNALING_-comparis.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

e parameter as X. As you saw, the module built as part of libgfortran deals with that. In the longer term, we would need a revamp of those modules to handle everything as intrinsic modules, which would give us more flexibility, but I never found the time to do this migration :( Best, FX

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

magic Thanks for the frank description, Thomas. To be honest, it reinforces my feeling from when this was originally proposed and added: why are we doing so much extra work for a feature that is used by such a tiny fraction of our user base. FX

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add IEEE_QUIET_* and IEEE_SIGNALING_* comparisons

d to get an OK on the middle-end part first, but I consider the Fortran part approved. Thanks, FX 0001-Add-__builtin_iseqsig.patch Description: Binary data 0002-Fortran-add-IEEE_QUIET_-and-IEEE_SIGNALING_-comparis.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

one for each ABI. I am sure this was considered and rejected, do you remember what was the rationale? Thanks, FX

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

Given the agreement that the patch is not making things for powerpc worse, and the review by Steve, I have committed as https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=17bccd1d2c0fa1f08e0483c8ed841994a95febb0 Best, FX

gcc/config.in was not regenerated

EFAULT_STK_CLASH_GUARD_SIZE which I think are because this commit https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=0a85544e1aaeca41133ecfc438cda913dbc0f122 should have regenerated and committed config.in <http://config.in/> Christina, can you please have a look? FX

libgfortran: remove support for --enable-intermodule

See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109373 I don’t believe it is widely used, and it was removed from everywhere else in gcc. Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK to commit? FX 0001-libgfortran-remove-support-for-enable-intermodule.patch Description: Binary data

Re: libgfortran: remove support for --enable-intermodule

> OK, thanks. Committed at https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=ecc96eb5d2a0e5dd93365ef76a58d7f754273934

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: add Fortran 2018 IEEE_{MIN,MAX} functions

“IEEE_SUPPORT_*” functions. FX

Re: [PATCH] Add __builtin_iseqsig()

e case of both quiet and signaling NaNs, which is now done > systematically. > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu > OK to commit? > > FX 0001-Add-__builtin_iseqsig.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] Add __builtin_iseqsig()

ping**2 > Le 6 juin 2023 à 20:15, FX Coudert a écrit : > > Hi, > > (It took me a while to get back to this.) > > This is a new and improved version of the patch at > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602932.html > It addresses the comment

Re: [PATCH] Add __builtin_iseqsig()

ping**3 >> Le 6 juin 2023 à 20:15, FX Coudert a écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> (It took me a while to get back to this.) >> >> This is a new and improved version of the patch at >> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602932.h

[PATCH] core: Support heap-based trampolines

. OK to commit? FX 0001-core-Support-heap-based-trampolines.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH] core: Support heap-based trampolines

Hi, > Since this affects the ABI of libgcc I think we don't want that part > to be user configurable but rather determined by > some static list of targets that opt-in to this config. If I do that, do the Linux maintainers want Linux in or out? > You mention setjmp/longjmp - on darwin and other

Re: [PATCH] Add __builtin_iseqsig()

6 weeks later, I’d like to ask a global maintainer to review this. The idea was okay’ed previously by Joseph Myers, but he asked for testing of both the quiet and signalling NaN cases, which is now done. FX > Le 6 juin 2023 à 20:15, FX Coudert a écrit : > > Hi, > > (It too

<    2   3   4   5   6   7